IS IT TRUE that according to credible sources at the Vanderburgh County Prosecutors Office that high volume of defendants who are only fluent in Haitian Creole, there are specific “Haitian Days” in the Vanderburgh County Misdemeanor Court that are typically held a couple of times a month?

IS IT TRUE that Translators are called in Vanderburgh County Misdemeanor court sessions and the non-English speakers will be addressed before any priorly scheduled English-speaking defendants, victims, or law enforcement as the non-English speakers can only be addressed when translators are available?

IS IT TRUE that It is not uncommon for a law enforcement officer to come in to testify in a misdemeanor case and have to wait several hours after his or her scheduled session due to the high volume of non-English speakers who receive priority when translators are available?

IS IT TRUE that over just two regular Misdemeanor Court sessions, 22 Defendants required a Haitian Creole translator – two of which have felonies in other jurisdictions?  …that Translators are also commonly used in the courts for the Spanish-speaking and Marshallese communities?

IS IT TRUE that EVSC recently sent out a plea to individuals or organizations that know people who are bi-lingual or multilingual?

IS IT TRUE that we have been told that the EVSC school system’s top three languages are Haitian-Creole, Marshallese, and Spanish? …that we have been told that EVSC has 50 plus nationalities, and isn;s not limiting additional languages.

IS IT TRUE that we have been told by credible sources tell us that there may be around 1,400 Haitian, Marshallese, and Spanish students enrolled in EVSC?  …that we have also been told that EVSC isn’t managing the unexpected influx of Haitian-Creole-speaking students?

Two Decades Later, the Enduring Legacy of 9/11

SEPTEMBER 11, 202

Americans watched in horror as the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, left nearly 3,000 people dead in New York City, Washington, D.C., and Shanksville, Pennsylvania. Nearly 20 years later, they watched in sorrow as the nation’s military mission in Afghanistan – which began less than a month after 9/11 – came to a bloody and chaotic conclusion.

The enduring power of the Sept. 11 attacks is clear: An overwhelming share of Americans who are old enough to recall the day remember where they were and what they were doing when they heard the news. Yet an ever-growing number of Americans have no personal memory of that day, either because they were too young or not yet born.

A review of U.S. public opinion in the two decades since 9/11 reveals how a badly shaken nation came together, briefly, in a spirit of sadness and patriotism; how the public initially rallied behind the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, though support waned over time; and how Americans viewed the threat of terrorism at home and the steps the government took to combat it.

As the country comes to grips with the tumultuous exit of U.S. military forces from Afghanistan, the departure has raised long-term questions about U.S. foreign policy and America’s place in the world. Yet the public’s initial judgments on that mission are clear: A majority endorses the decision to withdraw from Afghanistan, even as it criticizes the Biden administration’s handling of the situation. And after a war that cost thousands of lives – including more than 2,000 American service members – and trillions of dollars in military spending, a new Pew Research Center survey finds that 69% of U.S. adults say the United States has mostly failed to achieve its goals in Afghanistan.

A devastating emotional toll, a lasting historical legacy

Shock, sadness, fear, anger: The 9/11 attacks inflicted a devastating emotional toll on Americans. But as horrible as the events of that day were, a 63% majority of Americans said they couldn’t stop watching news coverage of the attacks.

Our first survey following the attacks went into the field just days after 9/11, from Sept. 13-17, 2001. A sizable majority of adults (71%) said they felt depressed, nearly half (49%) had difficulty concentrating and a third said they had trouble sleeping.

It was an era in which television was still the public’s dominant news source – 90% said they got most of their news about the attacks from television, compared with just 5% who got news online – and the televised images of death and destruction had a powerful impact. Around nine-in-ten Americans (92%) agreed with the statement, “I feel sad when watching TV coverage of the terrorist attacks.” A sizable majority (77%) also found it frightening to watch – but most did so anyway.

Americans were enraged by the attacks, too. Three weeks after 9/11, even as the psychological stress began to ease somewhat, 87% said they felt angry about the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon.

Fear was widespread, not just in the days immediately after the attacks, but throughout the fall of 2001. Most Americans said they were very (28%) or somewhat (45%) worried about another attack. When asked a year later to describe how their lives changed in a major way, about half of adults said they felt more afraid, more careful, more distrustful or more vulnerable as a result of the attacks.

Even after the immediate shock of 9/11 had subsided, concerns over terrorism remained at higher levels in major cities – especially New York and Washington – than in small towns and rural areas. The personal impact of the attacks also was felt more keenly in the cities directly targeted: Nearly a year after 9/11, about six-in-ten adults in the New York (61%) and Washington (63%) areas said the attacks had changed their lives at least a little, compared with 49% nationwide. This sentiment was shared by residents of other large cities. A quarter of people who lived in large cities nationwide said their lives had changed in a major way – twice the rate found in small towns and rural areas.

The impacts of the Sept. 11 attacks were deeply felt and slow to dissipate. By the following August, half of U.S. adults said the country “had changed in a major way” – a number that actually increased, to 61%, 10 years after the event.

A year after the attacks, in an open-ended question, most Americans – 80% – cited 9/11 as the most important event that had occurred in the country during the previous year. Strikingly, a larger share also volunteered it as the most important thing that happened to them personally in the prior year (38%) than mentioned other typical life events, such as births or deaths. Again, the personal impact was much greater in New York and Washington, where 51% and 44%, respectively, pointed to the attacks as the most significant personal event over the prior year.

Just as memories of 9/11 are firmly embedded in the minds of most Americans old enough to recall the attacks, their historical importance far surpasses other events in people’s lifetimes. In a survey conducted by Pew Research Center in association with A+E Networks’ HISTORY in 2016 – 15 years after 9/11 – 76% of adults named the Sept. 11 attacks as one of the 10 historical events of their lifetime that had the greatest impact on the country. The election of Barack Obama as the first Black president was a distant second, at 40%.

The importance of 9/11 transcended age, gender, geographic and even political differences. The 2016 study noted that while partisans agreed on little else that election cycle, more than seven-in-ten Republicans and Democrats named the attacks as one of their top 10 historic events.

Fighting federal overreach and job-killing climate extremism, Attorney General Todd Rokita leads multistate suit against Biden-Harris ‘Clean Power Plan 2.0’

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency edict is designed to expand control over lives and kill jobs

Taking the next step in a lawsuit of massive ramifications, Attorney General Todd Rokita and fellow plaintiffs have filed an opening brief in federal appeals court asserting that an invasive new EPA rule is unlawful.

Further, if implemented, the Biden-Harris administration rule would 1) threaten the reliability of America’s power grid, 2) jack up utility costs for U.S. consumers, 3) destroy jobs and 4) wreck the nation’s economy.

“This extremist rule would prove absolutely devastating to everyday, hardworking Hoosiers,” Attorney General Rokita said. “It would expand the federal government’s control of people’s lives without even helping conserve the natural environment in any meaningful way. Plus it would kill jobs.”

Attorney General Rokita announced in May that he and West Virginia’s attorney general were co-leading a 25-state lawsuit opposing the Biden-Harris administration’s “Clean Power Plan 2.0.” Other states and industry are challenging the rule as well.

The EPA rule takes deadly aim at coal-fired power plants — requiring many to capture 90% of carbon emissions using expensive, unproven technology. And in the meantime, as federal bureaucrats promise a future filled with unspecified “green” jobs, the EPA’s rule forces the premature closure of these plants. This takes a two-part hit on Hoosiers: the killing of jobs and the expansion of the federal government’s control over everyday people’s lives.

Countless hard workers are put in imminent and long-term peril, including the jobs of people in coal-fired power plants and adjacent employees who work for companies which provide supplies, transportation, logistics and other day-to-day services. By causing higher energy costs across all industries, the rule also forces budget-cutting and a potentially seismic reduction in the overall work force. This rule exceeds the agency’s statutory authority and gives insufficient consideration to important facts, such as cost and grid reliability.

“There is no justification — none — for surrendering state and local authority to power-hungry unelected bureaucrats in the federal government,” Attorney General Rokita said. “And we certainly face no dire crisis requiring us to torpedo our state and national economy.”

While the Biden administration seeks to appease the powerful political forces behind a radical clima