Home Blog Page 553

Otters sweep doubleheader to win third straight series

0

AUGUSTA, NJ. – The Evansville Otters stole the series away from the Sussex County Miners Sunday with two wins in a doubleheader at Skylands Stadium.

After dropping the series opener Saturday, the Otters (13-20) battled back to win both seven-inning games against the Miners (11-21).

Game 1 – Evansville 3, Sussex 1

The opener featured a pitchers duel from both starters. Parker Brahms (2-4) picked up the win after tossing five and two-third innings of one run ball.

Evansville jumped on the board first with a leadoff single from Dvaid Mendham, followed by an Anthony Calarco fielder’s choice RBI.

Randy Bednar homered to left field in the third inning, giving the Otters a 2-0 lead.

The only run of the game for Sussex came in the fourth frame, but Brahms buckled down and stranded another two runners on the bases to limit the damage.

Against the Miners bullpen, the final run of the game was a sacrifice fly from Blake Mozley, scoring Calarco who led off with a base hit.

In the bottom of the sixth inning, Michael McAvene (Sv. 2) came on and relieved Brahms by stranding a pair of inherited base runners. He registered the save after striking out two in the ninth during a one-two-three inning.

Bednar and Mendham each picked up two hits, and the Otters marched on to the nightcap.

Game 2 – Evansville 5, Sussex 2

Moving into the backend of the twin bill, Sussex scored first with their only two runs in the second inning.

The bullpen shined for Evansville, not giving up a run. Ryan Wiltse entered during the third inning and worked out of a bases loaded jam. Leoni De La Cruz and Jon Beymer had bounce back performances, and McAvene picked up his second save of the day in the final frame.

Beymer (2-0) was given the win after going six-up-six-down in the sixth and seventh frames.

In a 2-0 hole, Randy Bednar smacked his second home run of the day to left-center field in the fourth inning.

Later in the fifth, Mike Peabody singled with two outs, was moved to third and then scored on a wild pitch to tie the game at two.

Neither team could score again in the final two innings, and the game went to extras.

Evansville opened up the offense, scoring for three runs. With two outs and the bases loaded, Jomar Reyes singled to right-center and brought home two go-ahead runs for the Otters. Calarco followed up with another single to plate the final run of the game.

The life was sucked out of Skylands Stadium and Sussex went down one-two-three, with McAvene (Sv. 3) on the mound to close out the game again.

Calarco and Mike Peabody had multi-hit games and Reyes led the offense with two RBI. Bednar scored twice in the final contest.

Winners in their last three series, the Otters concluded their six-game road affair with four wins. They will now make the lengthy trek back to Evansville. After an off day on Monday, they will open a nine-game home stand on Tuesday against the Schaumburg Boomers. The first pitch is scheduled for 6:35 p.m. CT. Coverage is available on the Otters Digital Network and FloBaseball.

IU Swimming & Diving: Olympic Team Trials Updates

0

SUNDAY, JUNE 16 HEATS

Notes

Indianapolis’ Lucas Oil Stadium crowd welcomed two-time IU Olympian Lilly King with a roar as she opened her U.S. Olympic Team Trials program on Sunday.

  • King earned the top seed in Sunday night’s 100-meter breaststroke semifinal with a 1:06.05 in prelims – over half a second faster than the field.
  • Two-time Olympian Blake Pieroni posted his best 200-meter freestyle performance since his personal best 1:45.93 in 2013. Pieroni had not been under 1:47 since 2021 trials and announced his retirement in 2022 before recently returning to training at Indiana. The top six finishers from the 200 free final are expected to make the Olympics. Pieroni came into the meet as the No. 15 seed with a time of 1:47.02.
  • Anna Peplowski swam the No. 4 200-meter freestyle time in the morning, going 1:57.37. Peplowski has been as quick as 1:56.99.

Results

Men’s 200-meter freestyle

  • 2. Blake Pieroni – 1:46.09 (Qualified for Semifinal)
  • 23. Owen McDonald – 1:48.05
  • 31. Brendan Burns – 1:48.82

Men’s 400-meter IM

  • 37. Drew Reiter – 4:25.11
  • 49. Toby Barnett – 4:26.80
  • T52. Lucas Piunti – 4:27.04
  • T54. Tristan DeWitt – 4:27.51

Women’s 100-meter breaststroke

  • 1. Lilly King – 1:06.05 (Qualified for Semifinal)
  • 64. Kabria Chapman – 1:11.26

Men’s 100-meter backstroke

  • 45. Gavin Wight – 55.62

Women’s 200-meter freestyle

  • 4. Anna Peplowski – 1:57.37 (Qualified for Semifinal)
  • 45. Ella Ristic – 2:01.69

Next Session: Sunday, June 16 Finals

  • Men’s 200-meter freestyle semifinal (Pieroni)
  • Women’s 100-meter breaststroke semifinal (King)
  • Men’s 100-meter breaststroke final (Matheny)
  • Women’s 200-meter freestyle semifinal (Peplowski)

 

ABORTION BAN BEING CHALLENGED IN THE COURT OF LAW

3

ABORTION BAN BEING CHALLENGED IN THE COURT OF LAW

By Marilyn Odendahl

The Indiana Citizen

June 17, 2024

Indiana’s near-total abortion ban, signed by Gov. Eric Holcomb in August 2022, goes on trial Wednesday in Monroe County Circuit Court as medical professionals challenge the constitutionality of the statute.

At issue is whether the state’s restrictions on abortion, which allow a woman to terminate her pregnancy only in very limited circumstances, infringe on the Indiana Constitution’s protections on personal liberty. Plaintiffs assert in the case, Planned Parenthood Great Northwest, Hawai’i, Alaska, Indiana, Kentucky, Inc. et al. v. Members of the Indiana Medical Licensing Board of Indiana, et al., 53C06-2208-PL-001756, that the law violates Article 1, Section 1, of the state’s constitution by limiting when a woman can obtain an abortion to save her life or protect her from a serious health risk.

The bench trial is scheduled to last through Friday with the plaintiffs and defendants planning to call six witnesses each.

Noting the case has attracted substantial public interest and media attention, Special Judge Kelsey Hanlon from Owen County Circuit Court issued a decorum order outlining the rules for security, media and access to the courtroom that also banned photography and video during the hearing. Also, Hanlon’s order also said the court intends to livestream the proceedings.

On Friday, the plaintiffs and defendants filed a joint statement with the court, listing the undisputed and disputed facts in the case. The disputed facts include what health conditions and pregnancy complications could lead to a serious health risk and life-threatening risk for the woman; when is an abortion essential treatment; would an abortion be needed to prevent or resolve a serious mental health condition; and are physicians denying abortion care to patients whose serious physical and mental health conditions do not fit within the exceptions of the law.

History As A Defense

The plaintiffs are asking the trial court to issue a permanent injunction enjoining the enforcement of the law’s “serious health risk” provision. Specifically, the plaintiffs are seeking to block the law when it would prevent physicians from exercising their “reasonable medical judgment” and performing abortions due to health conditions which would require treatment that would endanger the fetus; could worsen or could cause debilitating symptoms during the pregnancy; and could cause lasting damage to the woman’s health, even after giving birth.

In their amended complaint, the plaintiffs argue, Indiana’s abortion law’s “extremely limited Health and Life Exception unnecessarily restricts access to abortion care inconsistent with medical consensus, chills the provision of medical care, and will inflict serious harm on patients already facing extraordinarily difficult circumstances.”

Defendants point to history and contend the framers of the Indiana Constitution did not intend to permit abortions in circumstances prohibited in the state’s abortion law. In fact, the defendants argue, the framers enacted more stringent limitations on abortions.

“Rather than engage in the required historical analysis, plaintiffs lob accusations about how (the Indiana abortion law) supposedly prevents abortions they deem ‘necessary,’” the defendants state in their response brief. “By ‘necessary,’ however, they do not mean ‘medically required.’ … Instead, plaintiffs consider abortion to be ‘necessary’ whenever a woman prefers abortion to childbirth.”

The American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana, along with attorneys from WilmerHale, the Lawyering Project and Planned Parenthood Federation of America, are representing the plaintiffs. The Indiana Attorney General’s office is representing the defendants. Attorneys from Schaerr Jaffe joined the defense team in December 2023.

In advance of the trial, Planned Parenthood released a joint statement reiterating what it sees as the potential harm Indiana’s abortion law can cause.

“This lawsuit seeks to restore access to health care to pregnant Hoosiers currently endangered by the unconstitutionally limited scope of the health or life exception to Indiana’s abortion ban,” the joint statement from Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Planned Parenthood Great Northwest, Hawai‘i, Alaska, Indiana, Kentucky, ACLU of Indiana, All-Options, the Lawyering Project said.

“Drafted in a breakneck special legislative session in 2022, the law’s exceptions were intentionally made as narrow as possible to appease state legislators arguing for a ban with no exceptions. As a result, Hoosiers with serious health complications have been forced to endure unjustifiable suffering due to miscarriages, ectopic pregnancies, and other pregnancy-related issues or leave the state to access appropriate care. Hoosiers deserve, and the Indiana Constitution demands, better.”

Indiana Right to Life did not release any pre-trial comment.

Indiana Supreme Court Finds Constitutional Right To Abortion

The Indiana General Assembly restricted access to abortions during a special session in the summer of 2022, less than two months after the U.S. Supreme Court issued its ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which held the U.S. Constitution does not provide women the right to an abortion. Despite strong opposition in the Indiana legislature, including some Republican lawmakers joining their Democratic colleagues in voting against the restrictions, Senate Enrolled Act 1 was signed into law hours after the measure landed on Holcomb’s desk.

SEA 1 prohibits abortions, except in cases of rape or incest, lethal fetal anomaly, a serious health risk to the pregnant woman or to save the mother’s life.

Also, the law requires that all abortions be performed only in a licensed hospital or an ambulatory surgical center owned by a hospital. In addition, a physician who performs an abortion prohibited by the law could face civil and criminal penalties, including up to six years in prison.

The plaintiffs immediately filed their original complaint weeks after SEA 1 was signed into law. In September 2022, Hanlon granted their motion for preliminary injunction, blocking the new abortion statute from taking effect.

Hanlon agreed with the plaintiffs that SEA 1 did materially burden women’s and girls’ right to bodily autonomy in violation of Article 1, Section 1’s protection of a person’s inalienable rights including liberty.

The state appealed directly to the Indiana Supreme Court and in a 4-1 decision issued in June 2023, the justices nixed the preliminary injunction and upheld the law. However, the majority also found Article 1, Section 1 of the state constitution does offer a limited protection for abortion.

“While Section 1 protects a woman’s right to an abortion that is necessary to protect her life or to protect her from a serious health risk, the provision does not protect a fundamental right to abortion in all circumstances,” Justice Derek Molter wrote for the majority. “And it is undisputed that protecting prenatal life falls within the State’s broad authority under Article 1, Section 1 to protect the public’s health, welfare, and safety.”

Fight Was Not Over

Following the Indiana Supreme Court’s ruling, the injunction was lifted and the state’s abortion law went into effect in August 2023.

However, declaring the fight for abortion rights was not over, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint in Monroe Circuit Court in November 2023. They modified their Article 1, Section 1 claim from arguing that the state’s near-total abortion ban prevented women from exercising their fundamental right to privacy to asserting the law violates the guarantees of liberty. Also, they dropped their claims that the abortion statute violates the Indiana Constitution’s equal privileges and immunities clause of Article 1, Section 2 and prohibition against vagueness in Article 1, Section 12.

Two of the original plaintiffs – Women’s Med Group Professional Corp. and Whole Woman’s Health Alliance – have been dismissed from the case.

Citing to the finding by the Indiana Supreme Court that Article 1, Section 1 provides some right to abortion, the plaintiffs argue the new law does not adequately protect Hoosiers’ constitutional rights.

“The (Indiana) Supreme Court was correct that (SEA) 1’s Health or Life Exception may not be broad enough to adequately protect the constitutional right to an abortion necessary to save a patient’s life or protect a patient from a serious health risk,” the plaintiffs said in their brief that accompanied their amended complaint. “By allowing abortion only in the most extreme circumstance, where the patient’s pregnancy poses a risk of ‘death or serious risk of substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function,’ (SEA) 1 violates the right to protect oneself from serious health risks guaranteed by Article 1, Section 1.”

The defendants, again, assert the new abortion restrictions are based on the framers’ intentions, long-held state law limiting access to abortion care and Indiana Supreme Court precedent.

“(SEA 1) permits abortions in more circumstances than were permitted throughout most of Indiana’s history,” the defendants stated in their response brief, noting exceptions for rape, incest and lethal fetal anomaly. “Thus, to declare S.B. 1 unconstitutional, the Court would have to declare all abortion regulations from 1836 to 1972 unconstitutional as well. But those regulations supply the best evidence for determining how those who drafted and ratified Article 1, Section 1 thought it applied in the abortion context.”

FOOTNOTE: Dwight Adams, a freelance editor and writer based in Indianapolis, edited this article. He is a former content editor, copy editor and digital producer at The Indianapolis Star and IndyStar.com, and worked as a planner for other newspapers, including the Louisville Courier-Journal.

The Indiana Citizen is a nonpartisan, nonprofit platform dedicated to increasing the number of informed and engaged Hoosier citizens. We are operated by the Indiana Citizen Education Foundation, Inc., a 501(c)(3) public charity. For questions about the story, contact Marilyn Odendahl at marilyn.odendahl@indianacitizen.org

Gov. Holcomb Celebrates Another Life Sciences Win in Bloomington with Simtra BioPharma Solutions

0

BLOOMINGTON, Ind. — Governor Eric J. Holcomb today joined executives of Simtra BioPharma Solutions (Simtra) and local officials to break ground on the company’s new state-of-the-art manufacturing facility in Monroe County.

Simtra 1

Fisher tapped as USI Director of University Budgeting

0

Amy Fisher has been selected as Director of University Budgeting at the University of Southern Indiana, effective Monday, June 24. She will report to Jeff Sickman, Assistant Vice President for Finance and Administration and Asisstant Treasurer.

As Director, Fisher will direct the development and administration of University operating, capital, project, and grant budgets in accord with the requirements of the State of Indiana, other applicable regulations and institutional policies.

Fisher previously served as Controller for JL Equipment/H&R Agri-Power in Poseyville, Indiana. Prior, she served in a multitude of roles at USI, including Manager of University Budgets, Manager of Accounting Operations, Senior Accountant and Staff Accountant.

She holds a bachelor’s degree in accounting and an MBA, both from USI.

Vanderburgh County Marriage Licenses Issued

0
marriage
marriage

 

Vanderburgh County Marriage Licenses Issued

Vanderburgh County Marriage Licenses Issued

DESTINY WELLS RESPONDS TO TODAY’S MOYLE V. UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT DECISION

0

DESTINY WELLS RESPONDS TO MOYLE V. UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT DECISION

INDIANAPOLIS—Destiny Wells, Democratic candidate for Indiana Attorney General, responded totoday’s Moyle v. United States Supreme Court of the United States decision affirming access to mifepristone – a safe, effective, FDA-approved medication that more than five million people have used over the last two decades.

“Since I returned home from serving in Afghanistan in 2017, I realized more than ever that women are the barometer of a healthy democracy,” Wells stated. “As Attorney General, I will stand by each Hoosier’s ability to determine their healthcare decisions—today’s SCOTUS decision preserving access to lifesaving medication is a win for American liberty.”

Background:

The Department of Justice (DOJ) sued the State of Idaho, arguing that the severity of the state’s abortion ban – which does not include an exception for women’s health – conflicts with the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) federal law that requires hospitals to provide stabilizing care to patients in emergency rooms, even if that means abortion care.

EMTALA preempts state laws, meaning that even if an abortion ban is in place medical providers can step in to treat and stabilize patients, even if that means with abortion care. (Note: Even with EMTALA protections, medical providers in states with extreme bans like Texas are struggling to understand where their hands begin to be tied by state abortion bans.)

In heated oral arguments on this case, justices tried to get clarity on what treatments would be covered, such as abortions that would preserve a woman’s organs, her fertility, prevent debilitating kidney diseases, etc. The anti-abortion defense by Idaho could not commit to which health-threatening conditions could legally be treated with abortion under their state laws.

Comedian Preacher Lawson to Perform in Jasper on October 1

0

Jasper, IN – Jasper Community Arts is thrilled to announce that comedian Preacher Lawson will perform live on Saturday, October 19, 2024. The show will start at 7:30 PM at the Jasper Arts Center and promises to be an unforgettable night of laughter and entertainment.

Preacher Lawson, known for his high-energy comedy and charismatic stage presence, first gained national attention as a finalist on the hit television show “America’s Got Talent.” Since then, he has continued to captivate audiences with his unique comedic style, earning him a dedicated fan base and numerous accolades.

“We are incredibly excited to bring Preacher Lawson to the Jasper Arts Center,” said Executive Director Kyle Rupert. “His talent for connecting with the audience and his hilarious, relatable material make him a perfect fit for our community. This is a show that you won’t want to miss!”

Preacher Lawson’s performance at Jasper Arts Center is part of his nationwide tour, which has been met with rave reviews. His blend of personal stories, observational humor, and physical comedy creates a dynamic performance that appeals to a wide range of audiences.

Tickets for the event are on sale now and can be purchased online here, by phone at (812) 482-3070, or at the box office located in the Thyen-Clark Cultural Center. Prices start at $30, with discounts available for students and seniors.

Jasper Community Arts is committed to providing high-quality entertainment and cultural experiences to the community. This event is expected to sell out quickly, so early ticket purchase is recommended.

For more information about Preacher Lawson and his upcoming performance, please visit the event page using the link above or contact JCA at 812-482-3070.