Practicing Pragmatism During a Pandemic: Indiana’s Appellate Courts Practically Apply Indiana’s Constitution in 2020

Indianapolis litigation partners Scott Chinn and Daniel Pulliam and associates Stephanie Gutwein and Elizabeth Little coauthored an article for Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law’s Indiana Law Review titled “Practicing Pragmatism During a Pandemic: Indiana’s Appellate Courts Practically Apply Indiana’s Constitution in 2020.”

The authors highlight that the Indiana appellate courts used their constitutional powers to pragmatically address issues associated with the COVID-19 pandemic and to clarify the test for constitutional double jeopardy violations in the latest survey period.

The article provides background and insights on several decisions from the Indiana Supreme Court, including cases where the Indiana Supreme Court invoked its original jurisdiction to adopt emergency court rules protecting stimulus payments received under the federal Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act. The authors also delve into the Indiana Supreme Court’s decision in Wadle v. Sate.

Additionally, the authors cover decisions from Indiana’s appellate courts during the survey period, which substantively addressed 12 areas.