Organization Day offers a glimpse of the upcoming session.

IU continues to confront freedom of speech issues.

And a test of Indiana's self-defense laws in Whitestown.

From the television studios at WFYI Public Media, it's Indiana Week in Review for the week ending November 21st, 2025.

Indiana Week in Review is produced by WFYI in association with Indiana Public Broadcasting Stations.

Indiana Senators voted to return for the 2026 legislative session in January, bucking calls from governor Mike Braun to meet next month to redraw congressional maps to favor Republicans.

As Ben Thorp reports, the decision comes as lawmakers return for Organization Day, the ceremonial start of the new legislative session.

The Trump administration has been ramping up pressure on Indiana's Republican lawmakers and has criticized governor Mike Braun.

Senate President Pro Tem Rodric Bray says while he wants Republicans to keep control of Congress, he doesn't feel redistricting is the right way to do it.

Trying to do the best thing for the state of Indiana and was was Wells for the United States of America.

Republican Senator Mike Young favors redistricting.

He said he'll cry if the Democrats are able to take back the U.S.

House.

I don't want to cry.

On Wednesday morning, following the election, knowing that we could have done something and we didn't.

In a statement, Braun said he will support primary challenges against senators who refuse to redraw maps.

So has this issue laid bare a divide amongst Indiana Republicans?

It's the first question for our Indiana Week and Review panel.

Democrat Ann DeLaney.

Republican Mike O'Brien.

Jon Schwantes, host of Indiana Lawmakers.

And Niki Kelly, editor in chief at Indiana Capital Chronicle.

I'm Jill Sheridan, managing editor at WFYI.

So, Mike, should current Republican lawmakers be worried, as the governor said about their districts being primaried now?

Some of them, sure.

But, there's a there's rhetoric around this that is like intense.

And then there's like, what's the actual math look like?

And so half the Senate's up every two years.

So it's 25 members up.

If you take away the Democrats two open seats for Republican retirements, where this issue may be raised, but it's not a motivator to have a competitive primary right now because the incumbents are retiring.

take away the undecideds, take away the 13 that support, that are openly supporting this, that are of those 25 running for reelection.

You're left with like four people.

That's great.

Good.

I'm sorry.

Great.

Good.

One of the undecideds, Nehemiah.

Rick Nehemiah up in northwest Indiana is on the other side is.

And Vander now is undecided.

Daniels, former Lake County chairman.

All they're saying is just show us the map.

Right.

We haven't seen anything.

Right.

We'll come off undecided once we see what we're talking about here, particularly Janelle, because he's he's running congressional races up there.

He knows what he's talking about in Lake County and what that what that looks like.

But of the four that are left.

Two of them, Senator Deery and Senator Buck already have primaries, but he had a primary because he told everybody locally he was going to retire.

And so people started running, and that was well before redistricting.

Deery does have a primary that's motivated by redistricting.

That's Micah Beckwith, you know, part of his team who's who's made this the issue.

The other two that are left are Kyle Walker from Indianapolis, who for Marion County chairman, one of the most capable political guys in the party, much less in the Senate.

and Travis Holdman, the Senate tax chair.

So if you want to go to the Markle pancake House and go start badmouthing Travis Holdman, like, see how far you get, you know, so but like he look at that and you go, what's the real exposure here.

So they're saying we're going to primary everybody.

Well are they going to if a lot of those 13 supporters of primaries and he's they just got one today up and or this week up in Northeast Indiana.

So yes, there's a lot of smoke around around primaries right now.

Are they motivated by redistricting?

1 or 2 are.

But the the idea you're going to go flip the whole Senate on redistricting is, it's not accurate.

If you take it a little further and go here.

What about a leadership challenge?

Because that's been suggested by the president, the governor, of the 19 who voted to come back in January.

And so to come back in December, or I'm sorry, who voted to come back in December who are presumptively for redistricting, reform.

Eight of those are committee chairs appointed by Berry.

And so they're in leadership.

You know, his deputy is, you know, Sarah Gardner's was one of those people in favor of redistricting.

So you start looking at the math and and you go, I don't know if there's anything here like, around the edges.

Sure.

It kind of reminds me of, like, the Liberty Caucus a couple of years ago.

Did 24 caucus or primaries against incumbent House Republicans, the primary two all from the right and 22 of the lost.

You know, so I think that's kind of like the dynamic that we're we're looking at here just because just because the math doesn't support it.

Well, we saw some math at the state House, you know, during Organization Day and a lot of, lot of drama as well, you know, the whole country looking at Indiana, really.

And this this week as lawmakers, you know, rejoin for Organization Day and looking at the the things that people are saying, you know, I mean Indiana's having a moment right now.

They are and they're rising to it.

I mean, I said last week that I thought there were enough principles, Republicans to stop the attempt to steal the election.

And I think the idea that it's going to steal the election or that that's going to make Donald Trump win is he has two more votes here, ignores history in in 2018, he lost 47 House seats.

Usually the number is 20.

He doubled the buyer's remorse in 2018.

He's going to triple it this year.

So the idea that you know the two in Indiana we're going to make a difference is completely illusory.

But I am glad that there were principled people who say that, you know, we have to have a system.

We have to operate under a series of rules, and we have to follow those rules, and we have to limit government in that way by following the rules that are there.

You don't change them in midstream because some narcissist in Washington, once complete power, you don't do that any more than you're in the NCAA, the NCAA double on finals.

And all of a sudden you say, you know, you refs are all going to be fired unless I have seven instead of five, you just don't do that.

And they they rose to the occasion.

They say that people have to have faith in the system.

And faith in the system means that you govern according to the rules that everybody recognizes.

And the idea that you would completely disenfranchize all Democrats from any representation in Congress is ridiculous.

But that's the kind of mantra that people like Beckwith and Braun are perpetrating.

And I think Mike's right.

I don't think they're going to make anything other than, around, maybe around the edges, maybe not even around the edges.

When you look at the kind of the weak, anemic demonstrations in favor of, redistricting they were able to generate, I think we're going to be fine.

And I think Indiana stood up.

And that's exactly what these state legislatures should be doing.

And now we've heard, Niki, you know, some rhetoric about let's just focus on, you know, district one then and like really make that, a primary concern.

Is that going to still be in play?

I mean, that's a fair discussion to have.

I mean, are you going to put are you going to spend more on a bunch of Senate Republican primaries in a flyover state, or could you just put that money into CD1?

I mean, Frank Ravanelli won with 54% of the vote last time, so that one is certainly within striking distance.

And would, you know, be done without the qualms that some Senate Republicans are having about changing these maps in mid-stream with no new census?

So, I mean, that's an idea is just pull your money on one thing instead of, you know, trying to oust a bunch of Senate Republicans who agree with you on 99 other things.

Well, Jon.

Maybe not going forward, though.

Obviously an organization day was, you know, an event this year and people are paying attention and people, you know, every day, people are paying attention, you know, to to the issue right now that may not, you know, have been as engaged as the session began last year.

is that what you're reading?

It is fun to see Indiana in the hub of everything.

it's nice to be the epicenter.

I think it is when I. When I'm not being paid to lobby one side or the other.

I like when people get engaged and pay attention.

How about that?

We'll start there.

I think if anything, the national focus solidifies the opposition to redistricting.

You have this is not, I think, the people who oppose this in the Senate.

It's not a political calculation to them.

It is a moral and a and a principle based calculation.

And that if anything, probably now they're emboldened because a lot of this, you know, conjecture that's gone on thus far suggests that the that the sort of phenomenon of Trump is defies all laws of nature and gravity and is static and will be forever.

I think we've already seen the high watermark, and I'm not the only person that would suggest that, you know, when archeologists come and see how the Trump flood, how high it went and then receded, I think it's receding now.

We're seeing people in Congress, Republicans for the first time saying, no, we're not going to do what you want.

We could sit here and cite a lot of, other issues that are getting a lot of attention.

But this is about Indiana, and I think we're seeing the same here.

I, I think people are looking at the long game and history and saying, you know, we have a lame duck president.

We have somebody who's stepped in quite a bit lately.

do I really want to have my kids and grandkids, looking at a vote that I sided with, what ultimately could be seen as a sad chapter in American history and in Indiana history.

I think the Capitol is spent.

I think Mike Braun, probably is is not going to win this and is probably damaged himself in some ways in the process.

So I don't see this, passing.

I haven't thought it was going to pass from day one, and I don't see anything to change that.

Well, obviously there are people out there, though, Mike, that are still, you know, on the side of let's redistrict, let's do what, you know, President Trump wants us to do.

And we're seeing the effects of that, I think as of taping today is 6 or 7, sorry, six, seven.

people have been, swatted, which is, you know, when, when, law enforcement is called to, to homes, but there's been a resounding, you know, didn't understanding that that's probably not the way to to resolve it.

So it's going to go the other direction.

Yeah.

I mean, those, those, those cases are extraordinary and should never happen.

but I mean, they are I mean, the redistricting forces have gained ground as this has gone on, but it's also gone on for three months.

And now we're within striking distance of the filing period open.

And and what you're really asking here is we're not redrawn two Democrat districts to make a Republican or redrawn nine.

And so nine incumbents are going to have all our parts.

I know you laugh when you say, oh yeah, they're going to go campaign, which is true, but also they're changing the rules on them, like, like right when they start and they, they've represented these places for two, for six years.

and now they're going to have all new district, new counties, and they're going to have no time.

Plus a primary challenge.

And it's like, what can go wrong with that plan?

And so with when Senator Brady comes along and says, why don't we just take all this money and effort, put it into the first district?

That makes a whole lot of sense.

A lot more.

So I don't think they're going to follow that, though.

I think those diehards, right wingers in your party are going to push all the way up to the session starting in January, and maybe even after that.

We'll keep in mind we've talked about the executive branch in terms of the governor and what the president wants.

We've talked about the, legislative branch in terms of, what the legislature may or may not do.

We can't leave the judiciary out of this.

Look at what happened in Texas, where you had, a district court and now a court of appeals that said those maps that were drawn, much ballyhooed maps that were drawed drawn at the urging of, the Trump administration, probably ran afoul of, the law, the Constitution, because as it's been interpreted by the Supreme Court, because it's racial, in nature.

And the Supreme Court has carved out that one.

They don't want to get into it.

Yeah, politics.

Gerrymandering is fine, but it can't be of racial nature.

And I would guarantee that if you see the districts in in the region and in Marion County, the same issue would, would appear.

And unless the Supreme Court acts very quickly and they've shown a willingness to do that, this will just be protracted in court for the same reasons it was in Texas.

Irony is quickly, I know we're running over here, but the California of the California approach to redistricting, because they went through a ballot referendum.

It's legally insulated.

So we could walk out.

Of this.

Losing with Indiana and court, Texas in court and net eight Democrats.

The New York Times this week did an analysis.

It's a net gain from that.

Well, certainly an interesting issue that has brought a lot of eyes to the statehouse ahead of the session.

now it is time in the show for our viewer viewer feedback.

Each week we pose an unscientific online poll question.

And this week's question, well, this rift among Indiana Senate Republicans last, yes or no?

Last week's question should out-of-state groups influence Indiana Republicans, as we were still talking about redistricting, 2%?

Yes, 98%.

Voting no.

If you would like to take part in the poll, go to wfyi.org/iwir and look for the poll.

Indiana University President Pamela Whitman is asking the for the faculty government to recommend whether the university adopt a set of guidelines for free expression on campus.

Ethan Sand Wines reports.

In a letter wouldn't ask the council to evaluate adopting the Chicago Principles, a statement on the value of free expression signed by many other universities.

The UFC, a faculty government of sorts elected by professors, is no longer able to pass policy since changes introduced this year at the statehouse and ratified by the IU Board of Trustees, the body now operates in a purely advisory capacity.

Whitney sent her request amidst a series of high profile cases that have led some to question the university's commitment to free speech.

Most recently, and IU professor was suspended from teaching after a student complained about a graphic she used describing Make America Great Again as a form of white supremacy.

The university also recently backtracked on a decision to end print editions of the Indiana Daily Student, after it directed the student newspaper to exclude news from physical copies.

So an is this response from IU leadership really going to make a difference.

Based on her performance?

Absolutely not.

I mean, she has been a disgrace in terms of First Amendment and free expression.

Our flagship universities are supposed to be places to develop critical thinking and exchange all kinds of ideas and come up with your own philosophy.

And she has shut that down at every turn.

She's had students arrested.

She's taken, Donna meadow away from them for demonstrations.

She's had a faculty member suspended because some students didn't like something that she had prepared and went to Jim Banks.

They didn't have the procedures followed.

They didn't do due process for or anything else.

Now she's going to the faculty who she and the legislature have stripped of any power.

I mean, through our history, it's always been the university administration and the faculty that run these higher institutions.

She's taken that power away from them and embarrassed us in Indiana.

And those who went to IU with her performance on free speech.

And now she wants, what, a fig leaf.

I mean, I don't have any particular problem with the Chicago, free speech items, but the idea that after she's done what she's done since she's been in office, now she comes back and says, we're going to protect free expression.

I think if she goes to the faculty for advice, the advice ought to be to resign.

Because that's just a Band-Aid.

Then on all these, you know, issues popping up at IU around freedom of expression, around freedom speech and also the law that you mentioned.

I mean, it does, you know, play a significant factor in what a council can, can or cannot do at IU.

I think it's I think we're at the end of it, but I think the reason they're looking at a more comprehensive policy and the Chicago model has been used by a lot of universities, but I think, I think it's because we have had these series of missteps that have required Aids that have gone completely unresolved, or largely unresolved, or they're, they're just triaging every, you know, situation where they're trying to, you know, suppress speech or break up protests or the other things that, like I did when I was in some liberal when I once I you either I've said this before like I would tell you, I was a poly sci major, I never I never expected I was getting a fair shake it Constitution class or Congress class or like these, all these classes I had to go.

To, I love.

I kind of liked it.

So surprised that I like sitting here.

Yeah.

You know, given time.

That's exactly.

Right.

And at some point, I'm tired.

Let the kids off the hook.

Show up and punch back.

If you know, if you don't like you, you think it's biased.

I don't expect the administration to come in and, like, suspend the professor and do all this, you know, snowflake stuff that we, you know, that we don't need going in.

But to make your case, stop whining.

The Band-Aid they're looking for and the series of mistakes are all hers, hers and the board appointed by Braun.

And, they have sanctioned all of those things.

I mean, changing the rules on dumb metal.

That was at midnight the night before of a secret meeting.

And then now she's going to be protecting free speech.

I have about as much confidence in that as I do.

And Todd Rokita as attorney general.

It's like you're I you season tickets are like at the.

Patriots.

I probably are.

But that's okay.

There are some things as as Senator Bray will tell worth fighting for.

Well Jon I mean what do you think?

You know, we have, you know, professors that are, do they need to be worried about what they're saying from day to day?

Yeah.

I mean, they are, but let's hope not.

I mean, thank goodness the football team has been winning this year.

We are a lot of fans among the IU nation or IU brethren.

The president should be the most enthusiastic supporter because it has masked a lot of the otherwise, embarrassing, Oh poll.

Positive taken place.

A lot of, ham fisted handling of a lot of First Amendment issues that are all self-inflicted wounds.

let's get this on the record.

The Chicago principals.

Great.

I love them.

Endorsed some wonderful 100 plus universities have it, but it's just enacting them.

That's only part of the battle.

The university administration has to live up to it because you have the group called fire, the foundation for individual and, individual rights and Expression.

They rank the schools based on how bad they are in terms of expression.

Well, we rank third from the bottom.

We were, the worst public institution.

And you know who was below us?

Barnard and Columbia.

Columbia accepted.

The Chicago principals in 2016.

Didn't do a lot to to boost them in the rankings.

So it's only comes as a matter of how we adhere to it.

Great.

And in principle, great in theory.

let's hope she could have done this on her own.

It strikes me as sort of the Trump administration's waiting for a bill to be passed before records are released.

Now that you have sort of an emasculated faculty anyway, why bother?

If you really want to stand up for the for expression, just do it.

If you want to stand up for expression to do it.

Well, what steps could the school take?

You know, at this point in the campaign?

Yes, this is a bit performative, but, you know, what are what what are students and, what should the school do?

I mean, they can adopt them.

But again, yeah, like Jon said, how you, implement them are key.

And someone said, should professors be worried?

And I think the answer is yes.

you know, from my understanding of this, this person that they've suspended, you know, it was based on one graphic, like there was nothing about whether, like, what is her overarching, you know, teaching is is rude to conservatives.

Does she let them also speak in class?

I mean, none of that was addressed.

It was just if you can get fired or suspended for one graphic you put out.

That's right.

That's serious.

And they took her off the class.

But it was a social work class.

I mean, these were also graduate students who, you know, are probably at a greater understanding and level of this work.

And so I know that part of.

This is about protecting students fragile feelings.

and upsetting them.

How about the teachers in my day and continue now, stand out there near Ballantine Hall in Woodburn, your old stomping grounds, and call people for whores, fornicators, sluts and worse.

I don't see the university trying to stamp that out, nor should they know.

But it's just attacking women.

Well, we know the attack.

Well, I mean, I think, you know, we're going to continue to, you know, see issues like this arise at universities as well.

If she continues her performance, we are if she's learned something from this, based on her reversal on the student newspaper, maybe she's learned something.

I don't know.

But she needs to learn.

She's doing it for the football program, though.

Maybe she's been.

And I always been good.

That's that's.

The most.

Important I know.

Well, the national championship is good.

Saddling a lot of wounds.

But the Boone County prosecutor charged a Whitestone homeowner with voluntary manslaughter this week after he shot and killed a woman who mistakenly came to his door earlier this month.

Zach Castle reports the officer's decision, which may turn into a larger test case for Indiana's Stand Your Ground law.

Sin is charged with a felony count of voluntary manslaughter for allegedly shooting Maria Florinda Ayoze Perez de Villa scans through his front door on November 5th.

Rios Perez was a member of a cleaning crew that mistakenly went to his address.

Anderson told police he thought people were trying to break in and fired one shot.

The shooting drew attention to Indiana's Stand Your Ground law, which allows a person to use reasonable force in self-defense.

Kent Eastwood is the Boone County prosecutor.

It is vitally important for the citizens of Boone County to understand that our decision today in no way should be interpreted as a challenge to Indiana.

Stand your ground law Rios Perez was a mother of four.

Last week, her family hosted a vigil in front of the prosecutor's office.

don't day your name.

Hello there.

You, young love.

So, Jon, with this case as well, grabbing national attention, could this become a test of Indiana self-defense?

I think it has certainly focused a lot of attention on it and brought it to the awareness of a lot of people who maybe have not really known what the law is here.

I don't think it's intended to be a challenge.

Certainly the prosecutor who filed these charges doesn't want it to be a challenge.

You look at the way the statute is written.

You have to have reasonable somebody has to be a reasonable, judgment.

That doesn't mean that a paranoiac, somehow has more constitutional rights than somebody who isn't paranoid.

I mean, according to the police report, he first went, he and his family first went to their safe room in the house before they got the guns.

And that might suggest their mindset that they're already predisposed to think that evil is about to befall them.

Maybe not as reasonable as those of us who don't have safe rooms in our houses.

and then also the proportionality of it, the old notion, you can't, you know, bring even even with the, the law as it's written here, I think you still can't, you know, if somebody pricks you with, a fountain pen, I can't blow an away.

I mean, it's attempted.

No, I wouldn't do that to you, but, I mean, you can't bring, you know, a Glock to, to a fistfight to a certain extent.

And and, I don't know, she had a mop and a broom, perhaps.

so, I think a firearm probably is a little disproportionate.

I make everything, you know, Indiana's law differs from other, you know, states that have similar laws.

But I have heard that, you know, Indiana's law is a little, you know, less stringent than than other states.

Are we are we going to as far as other cases that we've seen, you know, with this issue is just going to be different in this state?

I don't think the prosecutor I don't think the prosecutor would brought the charge if he thought that he had reasonably fit.

You know, this this acted reasonably fit within the parameters or the boundaries of what the, of what that law allows, which is if you believe you're about to be harmed or killed, then you've you have the right to some more than just stay reasonably believe, you know it just and he the prosecutor clearly by bringing the charge doesn't believe that that standard was met.

And so I don't think it's intended to be like a universal challenge to it or reconsideration of it.

It's just it's just did you meet the standard of the law and the prosecutor believes no, he did.

It's a pretty similar case to one that's been getting a lot of attention on Netflix for a documentary called Perfect Neighbor.

in that case, the Florida woman, knew who was knocking on her door, had already called police and told them to come.

And then shot through the closed door and she was found guilty.

She also tried the Stand Your Ground, so it's pretty similar.

he didn't know who was knocking, but there were keys.

I don't know of a lot of burglars who use keys to try to get in.

He didn't call the police before he shot, although apparently there is a safe room that was new to me.

So, Yeah, I mean, I think it'll.

Definitely the police.

It'll probably end up going to a jury and maybe they'll make a Netflix show.

I think it's we ought.

To do that.

We ought to give kudos to the Boone County prosecutor for having that.

That's Indiana we can review for this week.

Our panel has been Democrat Ann DeLaney.

Republican Mike O'Brien.

Jon Schwantes, host of Indiana Lawmakers.

And Niki Kelly, editor in chief at Indiana Capitol Chronicle.

You can find Indiana Week in Review podcasts and episodes at wfyi.org/iwir or on the PBS app.

I'm Jill Sheridan, managing editor at WFYI.

Join us next time, because a lot can happen in Indiana a week.

The views expressed are solely those of the panelists.

Indiana Week in Review is produced by WFYI in association with Indiana Public Broadcasting Stations.