Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita faces new complaint - from a Republican senator
Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita is facing another disciplinary complaint, this time filed by a state senator who says he made a "blatantly false" claim about her on a podcast this week.
Republican Sen. Liz Brown of Fort Wayne said she filed an official grievance with the Indiana Supreme Court's disciplinary commission after Rokita said Brown told him she has a family member who's an unlawful resident.
But Brown's office says Brown does not have a family member in the United States illegally.
Should the disciplinary commission decide to file a misconduct charge and launch an investigation, that would be Rokita's third since he took office.
What Rokita said and why he says he said it
The flap began on April 30 when Rokita appeared on a podcast called The Burning Truth with South Bend radio host Casey Hendrickson. Rokita said Brown told him that the reason she did not hold a hearing for a key immigration bill this session was because she had a family member who was an unlawful resident.
Rokita and even members of Indiana's Congressional delegation supported House Bill 1531, which would have enabled the governor to withhold funding from local governments that do not comply with U.S. Immigration Customs and Enforcement officials in their efforts to detain immigrants.
Brown, who chairs the Senate judiciary committee, declined to hold a hearing on the bill before the deadline, effectively killing it.
At the time and now, she said she was hearing many concerns from Hoosiers about how this bill would be enforced. In a statement to IndyStar on May 2, a spokesperson for Brown said an industry leader told her they'd have to violate federal law in order to comply with this bill ― and there was not enough time this session to iron out the problems with this bill.
On the podcast this week, Rokita said Brown killed the bill because she had a "personal grudge against the language," adding "she's got a family member who's an illegal alien."
"She can hold up the wishes of the entire state, but there's that," he said. Brown's office said that Rokita's comments had no grounding in reality.
"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," spokesperson Paige Gehlhausen wrote. "These public erroneous statements are made in an attempt to hurt the credibility and transparency needed and expected in the Indiana state legislative process."
In a statement to IndyStar after Brown filed her complaint, Rokita said Brown had told him her reasons were "very personal" and that she cited a "family member that was unsuccessful getting citizenship."
"Either Liz provided inaccurate or unclear information to me and others in the past, or she is backtracking now," Rokita said.
Addressing the complaint she filed, Rokita said, "Liz can get in line."
"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 said.
Rokita has faced disciplinary action before. The court in 2023 ruled that Rokita engaged in attorney misconduct when he called Indianapolis Dr. Caitlin Bernard an 'abortion activist acting as a doctor — with a history of failing to report" on Fox News.
After that ruling, when Rokita issued a press release that the commission thought contradicted his sworn affadavit, the commission filed an ethics complaint. Rokita sought to get the complaint dismissed, but was unsuccessful last week.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
29 minutes ago
- Axios
San Antonio City Council election results show changing politics
San Antonio City Council District 1 incumbent Sukh Kaur held on to her seat in Saturday's runoff election, in which three new city councilmembers were also elected in a political shakeup. Why it matters: A new generation of councilmembers can help shape a range of transformative city plans as they work with new mayor Gina Ortiz Jones over the next four years — but they'll also have to contend with a possible budget deficit and cuts to services. By the numbers: Kaur beat out conservative neighborhood leader Patty Gibbons 65% to 35% in the downtown area district, which now also includes some neighborhoods north of Loop 410. The big picture: The San Antonio City Council could have a starker political divide. It'sgaining one more progressive and one more conservative member, who are taking over seats previously held by business-friendly and moderate Democrats. Ortiz Jones is expected to lead as a progressive. The latest: In District 6 on the Far West Side, Ric Galvan (50.1%) beat Kelly Ann Gonzalez (49.9%) by just 25 votes. Both have progressive backgrounds running in a district that has previously elected Republicans and business-friendly Democrats. In District 8 on the Northwest Side, Ivalis Meza Gonzalez (57%) beat Paula McGee (43%). Meza Gonzalez is the former chief of staff to Mayor Ron Nirenberg, while McGee had experience on city boards and support from the Republican Party of Bexar County. In District 9 on the North Side, Misty Spears (57%) beat Angi Taylor Aramburu (43%), putting this more conservative district back in Republican hands for the first time in eight years. Spears has been the director of constituent services for Republican Bexar County Commissioner Grant Moody. Flashback: The four districts headed to the June runoff after no one earned more than 50% of the vote in the May 3 election. District 4 on the Southwest Side is newly represented by Edward Mungia, a former staff member in the office. He won outright in the May election.
Axios
29 minutes ago
- Axios
San Antonio mayor live election results: Gina Ortiz Jones wins race
San Antonio on Saturday elected Gina Ortiz Jones as its next mayor, choosing a Democrat instead of Republican Rolando Pablos for a nonpartisan race that became distinctly about politics. Why it matters: The mayoral election, the city's first in 16 years without an incumbent on the ballot, drew money and influence from across the state and nation. Neither Ortiz Jones nor Pablos have held elected office before, and San Antonio has not elected a mayor who hasn't served on the City Council since Phil Hardberger in 2005. The latest: Unofficial vote results showed Ortiz Jones with 54% of the vote compared to 46% for Pablos. All precincts were counted. What they're saying: Ortiz Jones told supporters at a watch party at The Dakota East Side Ice House that voters "reminded folks what San Antonio stands for," adding "that our city is about compassion and it's about leading with everybody in mind." "But you know what, our country — I think we're going through a blip right now, but San Antonio has had the opportunity to say, you know what? We're going to move past this," she added. Pablos conceded at his watch party, per KSAT. "We tried. I want to thank everybody for your support. It was a tough race, and I'm just happy that everybody came together for this community," he said. State of play: Ortiz Jones, who is believed to be the first openly gay woman elected San Antonio mayor, served as an Air Force undersecretary in the Biden administration and was twice the Democratic nominee for the 23rd Congressional District. During the runoff campaign, both candidates leaned into their families' immigrant backgrounds. Ortiz Jones spoke of being raised by a single mother who immigrated from the Philippines and Pablos of his family moving from Mexico to El Paso when he was 8 years old. Pablos is a former Texas secretary of state who has served as a senior adviser to Republican Gov. Greg Abbott. Follow the money: Pablos and his supporters appeared to both outraise and outspend Ortiz Jones in the runoff election, campaign finance reports show. Pablos raised nearly $333,000 and spent more than $275,000 from late April through May 28. He got a big boost from the Texas Economic Fund, a political action committee run by Abbott's former political director, which raised $1.35 million and spent over $623,000 during that time. Ortiz Jones raised nearly $249,000 and spent over $133,000 in the same period. She had help from Fields of Change, a national Democratic PAC, which spent more than $160,000 for her campaign. The big picture: The new mayor will lead San Antonio at a pivotal time, as officials seek to gain public support for a new downtown Spurs arena that could be surrounded by a sports and entertainment district. They will also lead the city through the remaining years of the Trump administration, under which San Antonio has lost millions of dollars in federal funding. The city is also expecting a budget deficit. Catch up quick: Mayor Ron Nirenberg reached his term limits after eight years in office, making him the city's longest-serving mayor since Henry Cisneros in the 1980s. San Antonio's next mayor will serve for four years after voters approved increasing term length from two years. They will work alongside several new city councilmembers members. Flashback: Nirenberg's departure left a rare opening that drew a crowded 27-candidate field to replace him. Four sitting city councilmembers struggled to break through the noise as traditional backers in local elections, like the police union, sat out the first round of voting. By the numbers: Voters showed low enthusiasm for the May 3 election, which overlapped with Fiesta, at 9.26%. In the runoff, turnout rose to nearly 17%.
Yahoo
37 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Gov. Stein is making the conservative case for FEMA
It's a classic Trump-era irony: The president's polarizing voice has triggered a burst of bipartisan agreement. When President Donald Trump floated the notion of scrapping FEMA entirely after Hurricane Helene, it sounded like the start of another bare-knuckle partisan fight. Instead, it sparked a rare consensus: FEMA is flawed, but it's also essential. Right now, the surprisingly high-profile defender of that notion is North Carolina Gov. Josh Stein. And in another ironic twist, the most liberal governor North Carolina has ever elected is sounding . . . conservative. Over the past two weeks, Stein has launched a media blitz to rescue FEMA from its own dysfunction — and from the president's crosshairs. He's appeared on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert, penned an op-ed in USA Today, lobbied Republican U.S. Sens. Thom Tillis and Ted Budd and written directly to the Trump administration with proposed reforms. His argument is simple: Disaster response is a core function of the federal government, and it saves money and gets better results if states don't go it alone. 'It's about streamlining and reforming and improving FEMA, not eliminating it,' Stein said in a recent podcast interview with Spectrum News. That may not sound revolutionary, but in today's political climate, it's a noteworthy response. Where many Democrats, like former Gov. Roy Cooper, may have used Trump's comments to raise money or fire up the base, Stein is taking a different tack. He's responding thoughtfully, and with a message that Republicans might actually hear. FEMA makes for a convenient punching bag. After any disaster, emotions are raw as survivors try to make sense of their losses. When calls go to voicemail or a form gets rejected on a technicality, the natural response is anger. Police officers often talk about trying to give people grace because they recognize they're meeting everyone on the worst day of their life. FEMA workers are in the same position but may not always realize it, or be equipped to respond. That doesn't mean FEMA gets a pass, of course, and there were plenty of problems with its response to Hurricane Helene. Red tape kept people waiting for temporary housing. It took multiple calls from elected officials to get FEMA to extend hotel vouchers to keep people from being turned out into a snowstorm. North Carolina's own shortcomings made matters worse. An after-action report from the state's Emergency Management Division showed deep cracks in the response to Helene — unclear communications, insufficient coordination with counties and a lack of planning around debris and housing. FEMA may have failed in some areas, but so did the state. Still, it would've been easy — even expected — for Stein to point fingers or escalate the fight as President Trump continues down the path toward eliminating FEMA. Instead, he's lowering the temperature. Trump's proposal to eliminate FEMA might be a negotiation tactic rather than a policy plan. He's known for throwing rhetorical grenades to draw people to the table. Some see that as bluster, while others see leverage. Either way, if the goal is to force FEMA to improve, there's plenty of common ground. And Stein is proving to be an effective messenger. He's called for FEMA to be faster, more flexible, and less redundant. He wants a single application process, more upfront money for permanent repairs and greater use of block grants to give states more discretion. This isn't the burn-it-down approach of the MAGA right, nor is it a progressive defense of bureaucracy. It's something rarer these days: a sober, statesmanlike argument for targeted federal responsibility and reform. As a conservative, I've long believed in limiting federal power. I've written before that North Carolina should stop waiting on Washington and take control of its own future. So I sympathize with Trump's instinct to scrap FEMA entirely. There's philosophical merit to the idea. The federal government tries to do too much. State governments are more nimble, more accountable. Pushing power down is almost always the right move. But not in every case. President Reagan famously said the nine scariest words in the English language were: 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.' And yet Reagan also signed the Stafford Act — the law that governs FEMA to this day. That law has real flaws, and some of them are exactly what we're grappling with now. That's another classic Trump-era irony. The liberal governor of North Carolina is defending FEMA with a Reaganesque argument, to preserve a program the Gipper helped create. I still believe in federalism. But on this one, Stein has convinced me. FEMA needs to stay.
