Ind. Supreme Court hears Burke/Bennett

INDIANAPOLIS (WTHI) - The Indiana Supreme Court heard from both sides in the case of Terre Haute Mayor Duke Bennett and former mayor Kevin Burke Thursday.

Burke filed suit after the November 2007 mayoral election, saying Bennett was in violation of the Mini Hatch Act and ineligible for office.

In November, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled Bennett was ineligible for office. The court also ruled that neither Bennett or Burke have a right to the office.

Click here to watch archive video of the oral arguments. Please note: Real Player is needed to view the video.

10:07 a.m.:  Burke's attorney Edward DeLaney started his case. Justice Frank Sullivan, Jr. has already asked about the Hatch Act and what makes the Hamilton Center fall under the provisions of the act. Bennett was employed at the Hamilton Center during his run for office. The Justices asked if this position could influence policy.

10:13 a.m.: Justice Sullivan told DeLaney "time is short." Both sides will have only 20 minutes to present their case, with five minutes spent on rebuttle. Justices are allowed to ask questions and interrupt the attorneys throughout.

10:15 a.m.: "We are not saying that anything Mr. Bennett did was corrupt," DeLaney said.

10:17 a.m.: "Why wasn't Judge Bolk right when he was asked to rule on this?" Justice Sullivan said. Justice Sullivan was referring to the ruling made by Vigo County Judge David Bolk that Bennett is eligible for the office of mayor.

10:18 a.m.: DeLaney said the violation of the Hatch Act occurred the day Bennett became a candidate.

10:21 a.m.: Justice Robert Rucker asked if the electorate was aware of the possible violation before the election or during the campaign.

10:23 a.m.: Burke's side completed their argument. Bennett's attorney Bryan Babb begun his case.

"This would overturn a long-standing Indiana election law that does not allow election losers to unseat election winners," Babb said. Babb said this would disenfranchise voters.

10:27 a.m.: Babb said Bennett read over Hatch Act and believed since he was not primarily employed by the Hamilton Center, so he was not in violation.

10:30 a.m.: "We deal with laws that don't make sense everyday," Justice Sullivan said. "Either your client applies to all of the provisions or none of the provisions." Justice Sullivan asked if Bennett could use his position to influence the election.

10:33 a.m.: Babb said the Indiana Court of Appeals had a broad interpretation of the Hatch Act.

10:35 a.m.: Justice Sullivan said that candidates who run for office who do not ever consult a lawyer would put them at risk for violation of not only the Hatch Act, but campaign finance law. Babb had suggested that candidates should not feel the need to consult a lawyer before running.

10:40 a.m.: Bennett's attorney Babb said assuming that the Bennett was ineligible, the voters still did not know about it. The Justices have been asking questions regularly throughout the agrument, but slowed down.

10:43 a.m.: Babb referred to a previous statement on how election losers should not be able to disenfranchise voters.

10:45 a.m.: DeLaney began making a rebuttal to Babb's arguments. The Justices can continue to ask questions.

10:49 a.m.: "The candidates are supposed to screen themselves," DeLaney said. DeLaney suggested that Bennett had options: He could have resigned or went to the Board of Elections.

10:51 a.m.: Justices recessed.

10:53 a.m.: The courtroom slowly emptied.