IBJNews

Judge orders Indiana recount chief into court

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A judge Monday ordered the head of the Indiana Recount Commission to appear before him this week to explain why the panel has not moved more quickly in considering whether Republican Secretary of State Charlie White was a valid candidate when he won election last fall.

WISH-TV reported Marion Circuit Judge Louis Rosenberg issued an order Monday setting a Thursday hearing at which Recount Commission Director Brad Skolnik would to be asked to show why he should not be held in contempt for not investigating White's voter registration quickly, as the judge had ordered.

Rosenberg also ordered Indiana GOP Chairman Eric Holcomb to appoint a member to the recount commission to replace White within two days. He also ordered Holcomb to appear at the Thursday hearing.

White, Indiana's top elections official, is accused of committing voter fraud by listing his ex-wife's address as his own on a voter registration form. White has previously acknowledged the voting error, chalking it up to his busy schedule and new marriage. Democrats want him ruled ineligible to serve and the runner-up declared the winner.

Rosenberg's order came after Indiana Democrats asked Rosenberg earlier Monday to set a deadline for the recount panel to reconsider the validity of White's candidacy or appoint his own fact-finding commission to do so.

Attorneys for Indiana Democratic Chairman Dan Parker filed a motion saying the Recount Commission had not yet met to discuss White's candidacy despite Rosenberg's April 7 ruling ordering the panel to handle the issue "expeditiously."

"It is now nearly three weeks since this court ordered the commission to move expeditiously and offered the commission the opportunity to work to restore the credibility of the political system in the eyes of Indiana voters," the motion said.

Since the April 7 ruling, Parker has named a new Democratic member to the politically appointed panel and White has recused himself as required by state law. GOP Chairman Eric Holcomb has yet to appoint White's replacement.

White's attorney appealed the April 7 ruling last week in a move that Democratic attorneys described as a stalling tactic to gain time for legislators to change the law governing who would replace White if he were removed. Democrats say state law currently requires the runner-up, Democrat Vop Osili, to replace White, but a bill in the General Assembly would allow such vacancies to be filled by the governor.

The motion also asked Rosenberg to order a fact-finding commission to report by May 20.

White's attorney, Jim Bopp, says the case is now in the hands of the Indiana Court of Appeals.

"We've appealed the judge's ruling, and that means the ruling isn't going to be acted upon until the courts decide if his ruling is valid or not," Bopp said.

But Democratic attorney Bill Groth said state law allows the case to continue unless a stay is ordered by the trial court or the Court of Appeals. Groth also said Rosenberg's ruling was not a final order and thus not immediately appealable, and he intends to file documents to have the appeal set aside.

Indiana Democrats called attention to the address discrepancy after White voted in last May's Republican primary. They contend White intentionally skirted the law to keep his seat on the Fishers Town Council after moving out of the district he represented.

After the Nov. 2 election, in which White beat Osili by about 345,000 votes, Democrats filed a petition with the Indiana Recount Commission challenging White's eligibility. The panel voted 2-1 along party lines to dismiss the challenge on Dec. 12, and Democrats appealed the decision in Marion Circuit Court.

In a separate criminal case stemming from the same circumstances, White was indicted March 3 on seven felony counts including voter fraud and perjury by a grand jury in Hamilton County, just outside Indianapolis. If convicted of a felony, he would have to resign.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Name The Judge.....
    ..Why does the article not name the Judge who issued the order to stay collection of the fines?
  • Hmmmmm
    It appears our Republican friends are scared to death about what an honest inquiry might reveal.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. These liberals are out of control. They want to drive our economy into the ground and double and triple our electric bills. Sierra Club, stay out of Indy!

  2. These activist liberal judges have gotten out of control. Thankfully we have a sensible supreme court that overturns their absurd rulings!

  3. Maybe they shouldn't be throwing money at the IRL or whatever they call it now. Probably should save that money for actual operations.

  4. For you central Indiana folks that don't know what a good pizza is, Aurelio's will take care of that. There are some good pizza places in central Indiana but nothing like this!!!

  5. I am troubled with this whole string of comments as I am not sure anyone pointed out that many of the "high paying" positions have been eliminated identified by asterisks as of fiscal year 2012. That indicates to me that the hospitals are making responsible yet difficult decisions and eliminating heavy paying positions. To make this more problematic, we have created a society of "entitlement" where individuals believe they should receive free services at no cost to them. I have yet to get a house repair done at no cost nor have I taken my car that is out of warranty for repair for free repair expecting the government to pay for it even though it is the second largest investment one makes in their life besides purchasing a home. Yet, we continue to hear verbal and aggressive abuse from the consumer who expects free services and have to reward them as a result of HCAHPS surveys which we have no influence over as it is 3rd party required by CMS. Peel the onion and get to the root of the problem...you will find that society has created the problem and our current political landscape and not the people who were fortunate to lead healthcare in the right direction before becoming distorted. As a side note, I had a friend sit in an ED in Canada for nearly two days prior to being evaluated and then finally...3 months later got a CT of the head. You pay for what you get...

ADVERTISEMENT