Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe NowIndiana Attorney General Todd Rokita’s claims about a sitting lawmaker—that she stopped an immigration bill for “personal reasons”—could land him in more legal hot water after she lodged a disciplinary action against him.
Rokita, in an archived April 30 interview with conservative radio host Casey Hendrickson, said the bill “stalled” because “someone had a personal grudge against the language,” naming Fort Wayne Sen. Liz Brown as the barrier.
“… (She) told me one of the reasons was she’s got a family member who’s an illegal alien,” Rokita told Hendrickson.
In a statement shared with the Indiana Capital Chronicle, a spokesperson for Brown called the claim “blatantly false.”
“Senator Brown does not have an illegal alien relative. This claim by Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita is blatantly false, and is meant to be misleading to Indiana constituents to make them think that Senator Brown has a personal conflict in performing her duties as Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee,” said her legislative office said. “These public erroneous statements are made in an attempt to hurt the credibility and transparency needed and expected in the Indiana state legislative process.”
Brown went on to confirm that she’d filed an official grievance and request for an investigation into Rokita’s comments with the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission.
Relevant background
The underlying bill, House Bill 1531, would have required local law enforcement officers to comply with federal detainer requests for undocumented immigrants. It would have also banned employers from hiring unauthorized residents.
Though the bill passed out of the House on a 64-26 vote, it never got a hearing in the Senate, where it was assigned to Brown’s committee. As the chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Brown has the power to select which bills get a hearing—though bills can be reassigned to other committees to circumvent a chair.
When author Rep. J.D. Prescott was asked about the bill’s demise by the Indiana Capital Chronicle, he referred questions to Brown.
Brown, an attorney, said she’d shared concerns with Rokita about the legislation “early in the legislative process.” The statement cited the condensed timeline during a budget-writing session and said Hoosiers had shared issues regarding potential impacts, including the possibility of a conflict with federal law.
Instead, the office pointed to her support for House Enrolled Act 1393, which would require local law enforcement to notify federal immigration authorities about undocumented immigrants in custody.
“(Brown) commends President Trump for the decisive actions he has taken federally to stop the flow of illegal immigration,” the statement concluded.
Rokita fired back, saying in a statement that Brown either “provided inaccurate or unclear information to me and others in the past, or she is backtracking now.”
“As for a disciplinary complaint, Liz can get in line. She didn’t give my office the authority to investigate illegal aliens, but she wants others to investigate me over comments she made. How ironic,” Rokita said. “This is also another example of weaponization of the Indiana court system to attempt to silence me and the people of this state who are tired of sending representatives to Indianapolis who don’t really represent them.”
He went on to accuse the disciplinary commission of encouraging “this political lawfare” by endorsing political candidates, making donations and accepting complaints from “politically partisan people.”
Rokita has faced the disciplinary commission before. He continues to litigate a case in which he called a practicing OB-GYN an “activist acting as a doctor” after she mentioned seeing a 10-year-old rape victim from Ohio travel to Indiana for an abortion. She was later fined by the Medical Licensing Board for sharing patient information—a move supported by Rokita.
Though reprimanded by the state’s Supreme Court justices, a subsequent press release from Rokita’s office and his public statements have prompted further scrutiny.
The Indiana Capital Chronicle is an independent, not-for-profit news organization that covers state government, policy and elections.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.
This guy can’t stop shooting himself in the foot. He uses government-paid lawyers to defend his idiotic behavior.
At what point do we just get rid of this guy and get someone who hasn’t received a law degree from trump university and a bachelor from university of phoenix online?
Legislators could have just impeached him, as opposed to wasting time with bills asking for the least favorable parts of Illinois to join Indiana.
well, maybe they could have impeached him. Harking back to the Curtis Hill debacle, it’s not clear under Indiana law if the AG can be impeached. The AG is not a “Constitutional” office, but one created by the Legislature. So the Constitution’s impeachment process may not apply. And because he is a separately elected official, he might not be subject to other removal by the legislature. If he loses his license to practice law, then he can’t be the Attorney General. Or he could commit a misdemeanor or felony I believe the legislature can remove him. The crime would also be a the basis for the Indiana Supreme Court to take his license.
Unlike non-lawyers, lawyers in legislatures and governmental offices like AG have a heightened duty to not lie. It is sanctionable, and can result in a loss of license. Most lawyers elected to office therefore keep a lid on…
Why this politician? Probably because a substantial number of Republicans are tired of Rokita, and hoped someone would run against him in 2024 primaries. So when he’s lying about them, they’re more likely to file disciplinary complaints, knowing he’s already in trouble with the Supreme Court over his 2023 nose-thumbing of the court…
Rokita, Morales, Beckwith, Banks – how I long for the Indiana GOP of Lugar, Hudnut, Daniels, and most importantly a functional two party system that made government better for all of us.
+1
how do we get rid of this guy? When can we get rid of this guy? Well, Hoosiers just relected him last fall for another four year term. So, we can get rid of him in 2028, or sooner if the Indiana Supreme Court calls his bluff and suspends his license…
No fan of the AG and would just as soon not see him in that position. That being said, this is a pretty thin disc. complaint. ALL politicians (including attorneys) stretch the truth (or not tell the truth) at times. That may be cause to vote them out of office, but should not be the basis of a disc. complaint.
One deth protest too much…..Makes you wonder why a State Senator is filing a DP against the AG???
The most truthful statement Rokita has ever made: “the people of this state who are tired of sending representatives to Indianapolis who don’t really represent them.” The General Assembly is dominated by his own party and they adopt laws seeking problems to solve to fit their own agenda rather than acting on the will of the Hoosier people.