logo
Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita seeks dismissal of latest disciplinary commission charges

Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita seeks dismissal of latest disciplinary commission charges

Yahoo21-02-2025

Attorney General Todd Rokita filed a motion to dismiss a new complaint filed against him by the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission. (Nathan Gotsch/Fort Wayne Politics)
Attorney General Todd Rokita is seeking to dismiss a new complaint filed against him by the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission, calling it an 'impermissible attempt to restrain an elected official and candidate's political speech.'
The 26-page document filed Thursday argued Rokita did not contradict an earlier disciplinary agreement or sworn affidavit. Rather, the Republican attorney general maintained the disciplinary commission's latest complaint violated Indiana law, specifically the 'constitutional separation of powers principles.'
Rokita's motion also contends that the charges violate his First Amendment right to free speech and Indiana's Anti-SLAPP statute intended to protect speech against legal challenges.
Story continues below.
Motion to Dismiss (2)
In a sworn affidavit, Rokita accepted responsibility for misconduct in exchange for a public reprimand last year. In its new complaint filed in late January, the commission found that Rokita almost immediately released a statement contradicting his admission.
Adrienne Meiring, executive director of the disciplinary commission, wrote in the complaint that 'this retraction of acceptance of responsibility demonstrates that the respondent was not candid with the court when he attested that he admitted he had violated Indiana Professional Conduct Rules.'
Rokita countered in his motion to dismiss that he 'should be permitted to speak freely to his constituents without the constant threat of an unelected commission parsing his every word, ready to pounce with a disciplinary action when they perceive any imagined inconsistency.'
'Given the serious constitutional, statutory and factual problems with its case,' he continued, the 'right thing' for the commission to do is 'withdraw its complaint.'
Rokita held, too, that the commission's action 'poses a significant risk' to his 'credibility with the bar and the public.'
Central to the disciplinary commission's complaint is Rokita's sworn conditional agreement regarding his discipline, and a subsequent press release issued by the attorney general.
In a 2022 interview with Fox News commentator Jesse Watters, Rokita called Bernard an 'activist acting as a doctor' and said his office would be investigating her conduct.
That November, a split-decision and public reprimand from state Supreme Court justices found that he had violated two of the Rules of Professional Conduct for lawyers:
They said Rokita's comments constituted an 'extrajudicial statement' that he knew — or reasonably should have known — would be publicly disseminated and would prejudice related legal proceedings.
They also said his statements had 'no substantial purpose' other than to embarrass or burden Dr. Caitlin Bernard.
Rokita and the commission agreed to the discipline in the conditional agreement. In a sworn affidavit, Rokita admitted to the two violations and acknowledged he couldn't have defended himself successfully on the charges if the matter were tried.
The parties disputed over a third charge — engaging in conduct 'that is prejudicial to the administration of justice' — which the commission agreed to dismiss in exchange for 'admission to misconduct' on the others.
Rokita's punishment included a public reprimand and $250 in court costs.
But the same day the reprimand was handed down, Rokita shared a lengthy and unrepentant statement, defending his 'true' remarks in which he attacked the news media, medical field and 'cancel culture.'
The disciplinary commission pointed to those remarks — as well as earlier drafts of the statement obtained by subpoena, and a recent quote provided to the Indiana Lawyer — as evidence of Rokita's 'lack of candor and dishonesty to the Court' after he agreed to accept responsibility for misconduct.
But Rokita sees the situation differently. In his motion, he called the disciplinary commission's latest complaint 'unconstitutional harassment.'
The document argues the disciplinary commission is 'thought-policing' the attorney general, and that Rokita is being retaliated against for 'daring to propose common-sense reforms to the disciplinary process.'
Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita faces three new disciplinary charges
He took particular issue with his press release issued after the original reprimand. Rokita pointed specifically to this statement made in that 2023 release: 'I deny and was not found to have violated anyone's confidentiality or any laws. I was not fined.'
Parsing words, Rokita argued those statements are true because — although he was reprimanded for violating certain lawyer conduct rules — those rules are not statutory laws.
'The commission's decision to bring a disciplinary action based on differing colloquial and legal interpretations of a term in an attempt to fabricate misrepresentation where none exists is wrong and, frankly, shocking,' Rokita said in his motion.
The attorney general additionally pushed back against the commission's reference to the statement he gave to The Indiana Lawyer: 'One thing that is clear is that the AG did nothing dishonest, illegal or even wrong, and he will continue to fight for the people of this state no matter how much the left hates it,' Rokita said in a written statement to publication.
The commission used the remarks as further evidence of Rokita's failure to accept responsibility for actions that led to his prior discipline.
But Rokita argued that the article's context shows his quote 'was plainly' referring to at least three conduct complaints filed against him by 'Democratic activists' after his reprimand and not to the reprimand itself.
The commission's decision to bring a disciplinary action based on differing colloquial and legal interpretations of a term in an attempt to fabricate misrepresentation where none exists is wrong and, frankly, shocking.
– Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita
'The Commission rips this quote out of context to create a false narrative that Respondent was dishonest,' Rokita wrote in his motion to dismiss. 'As the full context shows, Respondent's quote was responding to the recent wave of politically motivated disciplinary complaints and the ensuing investigations the Commission started as a result of those politically motivated grievances filed and intentionally made public during Respondent's re-election campaign by self-described liberal activist attorneys.'
Rokita also accused the commission of retaliating against him for his proposals to change Indiana's disciplinary rules for lawyers to more clearly allow for political speech.
A decision on the dismissal motion and the disciplinary commission's new complaint is up to the Indiana Supreme Court.
If the charges aren't dismissed — or if the disciplinary commission and Rokita can't reach a settlement agreement — the state's high court justices will appoint a hearing officer to hold a public hearing on the case and hear evidence.
It would be up to the hearing officer to then issue findings and recommendations to the court, which has final say over the outcome of the case.
Sanctions depend on the seriousness of the case. Possible sanctions include:
a private or public reprimand;
suspension from practice for a set period of time;
suspension from practice with reinstatement only after the lawyer proves fitness; and
permanent disbarment.
The vast majority of grievances filed with the commission are dismissed, however.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

LA cops finally tackle in anti-ICE rioters — as first Trump-ordered National Guard troops arrive
LA cops finally tackle in anti-ICE rioters — as first Trump-ordered National Guard troops arrive

New York Post

time44 minutes ago

  • New York Post

LA cops finally tackle in anti-ICE rioters — as first Trump-ordered National Guard troops arrive

Cops in Los Angeles have finally intervened in response to escalating anti-ICE riots in the city after being ordered to stand by as protesters pelted federal immigration agents with rocks and tried to block them from carrying out raids to arrest illegal migrants on Saturday. The LAPD and Los Angeles County sheriff's deputies fought running battles with protesters who mobbed downtown LA and the suburb of Paramount, California — ordering the protesters to disperse. Sanctuary laws prevent local cops in LA from assisting the feds with immigration enforcement. But last night, the LAPD declared a downtown protest illegal and pushed to break up the crowd. Meanwhile, the first of 2,000 California National Guard troops called up by President Trump arrived in the city to help restore and maintain order. 7 An anti-ICE protester waves a Mexican flag during violence in Los Angeles on Saturday. REUTERS Outside the city, two people were arrested for assault on a peace officers, one for allegedly throwing a Molotov cocktail that hit three deputies, LA Sheriff's Department officials confirmed to CBS News Los Angeles late Saturday. LA Mayor Karen Bass has been blamed for helping to foment the riots against ICE. Following raids on Friday, she responded by claiming that the federal agents used tactics that, 'sow terror in our communities and disrupt basic principles of safety in our city.' 7 Local police have finally been deployed in response to the LA riots. AFP via Getty Images 7 The riots were triggered by ICE raids on Friday. REUTERS Los Angeles Police Chief Jim McDonnell issued a statement Friday saying, 'I want to make it clear: the LAPD is not involved in civil immigration enforcement.' As a result, Trump mobilized the California National Guard and called for a ban on masks at protests. Secretary of Defense Hegseth also said active duty Marines could be called up. He argued that using US troops for law enforcement would not be a violation of the longstanding Posse Comitatus act because the immigrants being targeted by ICE are foreign invaders. 'The violent mob assaults on ICE and Federal Law Enforcement are designed to prevent the removal of Criminal Illegal Aliens from our soil; a dangerous invasion facilitated by criminal cartels (aka Foreign Terrorist Organizations) and a huge NATIONAL SECURITY RISK,' Hegseth wrote in a post on X. 'Under President Trump, violence & destruction against federal agents and federal facilities will NOT be tolerated. It's COMMON SENSE. The Department of Defense is mobilizing the National Guard IMMEDIATELY to support federal law enforcement in Los Angeles. And, if violence continues, active duty Marines at Camp Pendleton will also be mobilized — they are on high alert,' he added. More than 100 migrants have been arrested by ICE since the raids began on Friday. On Saturday, President Trump announced that the National Guard was being deployed to Los Angeles in response to the large-scale protests that broke out following dozens of arrests on Friday in citywide ICE operations. 7 Stores have been looted in the carnage. AFP via Getty Images 'If Governor Gavin Newscum, of California, and Mayor Karen Bass, of Los Angeles, can't do their jobs, which everyone knows they can't, then the Federal Government will step in and solve the problem, RIOTS & LOOTERS, the way it should be solved!!!' President Trump posted on his Truth Social platform yesterday evening. At least 2,000 National Guard troops are to be deployed under the president's Title 10 authority 'for 60 days or at the discretion of the Secretary of Defense,' President Trump's memo stated. 7 Border Patrol officers deployed tear gas on the crowds. AP 7 Fires raged in downtown LA and in Paramount. AP 7 The violence continued late on Saturday. Getty Images Trump signed the order shortly before he attended a UFC fight in New Jersey, where he sat ringside with boxer Mike Tyson. Gov. Gavin Newsom spoke out in the wake of the order, ahead of a reported 40-minute conversation with President Trump. Newsom wrote that the 'federal government is moving to take over the California National Guard and deploy 2,000 soldiers. That move is purposefully inflammatory and will only escalate tensions. LA authorities are able to access law enforcement assistance at a moment's notice,' in a statement posted on X on Saturday. 'We are in close coordination with the city and county, and there is currently no unmet need. The Guard has been admirably serving LA throughout recovery. This is the wrong mission and will erode public trust,' he said.

Trump's palace coup leaves NASA in limbo
Trump's palace coup leaves NASA in limbo

The Hill

timean hour ago

  • The Hill

Trump's palace coup leaves NASA in limbo

When President-elect Donald Trump nominated Jared Isaacman to become NASA administrator, it seemed like a brilliant choice. Business entrepreneur, private astronaut, Isaacman was just the man to revamp NASA and make it into a catalyst for taking humanity to the moon, Mars and beyond. Isaacman sailed through the confirmation process in the Senate Commerce Committee, chaired by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), by a vote of 19 to 9. He was poised to be confirmed by the full Senate when something so bizarre happened that it beggars the imagination. The White House suddenly and with no clear reason why, pulled Isaacman's nomination. After months of a confirmation process, NASA was back to square one for getting a new leader. Ars Technica's Eric Berger offered an explanation as to why. 'One mark against Isaacman is that he had recently donated money to Democrats,' he wrote. 'He also indicated opposition to some of the White House's proposed cuts to NASA's science budget.' But these facts were well known even before Trump nominated Isaacman. Trump himself, before he ran for president as a Republican, donated to Democrats and was close friends with Bill and Hillary Clinton. Berger goes on to say that a source told the publication that, 'with Musk's exit, his opponents within the administration sought to punish him by killing Isaacman's nomination.' The idea that Isaacman's nomination is being deep-sixed because of Musk runs contrary to the public praise that the president has given the billionaire rocket and electric car entrepreneur. Trump was uncharacteristically terse in his own social media post. 'After a thorough review of prior associations, I am hereby withdrawing the nomination of Jared Isaacman to head NASA,' he wrote. 'I will soon announce a new nominee who will be mission aligned, and put America First in Space. Thank you for your attention to this matter!' CNN reports that Isaacman's ouster was the result of a palace coup, noting that a source said, 'Musk's exit left room for a faction of people in Trump's inner circle, particularly Sergio Gor, the longtime Trump supporter and director of the White House Presidential Personnel Office, to advocate for installing a different nominee.' The motive seems to be discontent about the outsized influence that Musk has had on the White House and a desire to take him down a peg or two. Isaacman was profoundly gracious, stating in part, 'I am incredibly grateful to President Trump @POTUS, the Senate and all those who supported me throughout this journey. The past six months have been enlightening and, honestly, a bit thrilling. I have gained a much deeper appreciation for the complexities of government and the weight our political leaders carry.' The idea that a man like Isaacman, well respected by the aerospace community, who was predicted to sail through a confirmation vote in the full Senate, could be taken down by an obscure bureaucrat in White House intrigue, motivated by petty spite, is mind boggling. Even Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), who has not been fond of Trump's space policy, was appalled. He posted on his X account that Isaacman 'ran into the kind of politics that is damaging our country.' 'Republicans and Democrats supported him as the right guy at the right time for the top job at NASA, but it wasn't enough.' NASA is in for months more of turmoil and uncertainty as the nomination process gets reset and starts grinding its way through the Senate. The draconian, truncated budget proposal is certainly not helpful, either. Congress, which had been supportive of Trump's space policy, is not likely to be pleased by the president's high-handed shivving of his own nominee. Whoever Trump chooses to replace Isaacman as NASA administrator nominee, no matter how qualified, should face some very direct questioning. Trump's NASA budget proposal should be dead on arrival, which, considering the cuts in science and technology, is not necessarily a bad thing. China must be looking at the spectacle of NASA being mired in political wrangling, a leadership vacuum and budget uncertainty with glee. Beijing has its own space ambitions, with a planned crewed lunar landing by 2030. It's possible that the Chinese will steal a march on NASA, with all the damage that will do to America's standing in the world. It didn't have to be this way. Isaacman could be settling in as NASA administrator, deploying his business acumen and vision to lead the space agency to its greatest achievements. Instead, America's space effort has received a self-inflicted blow from which it will be long in recovering, Mark R. Whittington, who writes frequently about space policy, has published a political study of space exploration entitled 'Why is It So Hard to Go Back to the Moon?' as well as 'The Moon, Mars and Beyond,' and, most recently, 'Why is America Going Back to the Moon?' He blogs at Curmudgeons Corner.

Ken Martin privately expressed doubt about ability to lead DNC, blaming David Hogg
Ken Martin privately expressed doubt about ability to lead DNC, blaming David Hogg

Politico

timean hour ago

  • Politico

Ken Martin privately expressed doubt about ability to lead DNC, blaming David Hogg

Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin told party leaders in a recent private conversation that he's unsure about his ability to lead the party because of infighting created by Vice Chair David Hogg. 'I'll be very honest with you, for the first time in my 100 days on this job … the other night I said to myself for the first time, I don't know if I wanna do this anymore,' he said in a May 15 Zoom meeting of DNC officers, according to a recording obtained by POLITICO. In the recording, an emotional Martin describes being deeply frustrated by the fallout over Hogg, who has ignited a firestorm in the party by vowing to spend $20 million in safe-blue primaries to oust incumbent Democrats he believes are ineffective. Martin paused twice while appearing to choke up. The intraparty feud, Martin said on the recording, is making it more difficult for the party to do its work — and had ruined his ability to demonstrate leadership. 'No one knows who the hell I am, right? I'm trying to get my sea legs underneath of me and actually develop any amount of credibility so I can go out there and raise the money and do the job I need to to put ourselves in a position to win,' Martin said, addressing Hogg. 'And again, I don't think you intended this, but you essentially destroyed any chance I have to show the leadership that I need to. So it's really frustrating.' It was an extraordinary admission from the chair of the Democratic Party, just a few months after being elected to lead the party through its post-2024 crisis. The nearly two-minute clip does not include the entire conversation, including how Hogg and others may have responded to Martin. Asked for an interview, Martin, 51, sent a statement through a spokesperson. In it, he said, 'I'm not going anywhere.' 'I took this job to fight Republicans, not Democrats,' he added. 'As I said when I was elected, our fight is not within the Democratic Party, our fight is and has to be solely focused on Donald Trump and the disastrous Republican agenda. That's the work that I will continue to do every day.' Hogg, 25, did not respond to a request for comment. The Zoom meeting took place a few days after a DNC panel recommended holding new elections for the seats held by Hogg and another vice chair, Malcolm Kenyatta, on procedural grounds. DNC members will decide whether to do so in a vote set to begin on Monday. Roughly 10 people attended the May 15 Zoom meeting, including DNC officers and staff, according to two people familiar with the call who were granted anonymity to describe the private conversation. Asked for comment, party leaders rallied behind Martin, expressing confidence in his leadership. In a statement, DNC Associate Chair Shasti Conrad, who attended the Zoom meeting and was briefly mentioned on it, said Martin 'showed vulnerability in a private conversation' and 'stood up' for the Democratic Party. 'He shows up with authenticity. Always,' she said. 'That's what you'll hear on the tape.' Jane Kleeb, president of the Association of State Democratic Committees, was on the call and said she was 'proud of' Martin and the work the party is doing. Kenyatta, who was also at the meeting, similarly stood by Martin: 'Breaking news: a human being had a frustrating day at work. That's all Ken expressed on that call.' After POLITICO reached out to Martin and the DNC, three party officers who were on the call but not contacted by POLITICO sent statements of support for Martin: DNC Associate Chair Stuart Appelbaum, DNC Secretary Jason Rae and Rep. Joyce Beatty (D-Ohio), a DNC associate chair and former chair of the Congressional Black Caucus. Martin, who won a contested election to be DNC chair in February, formerly led the Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party for about 14 years. He was also previously president of the Association of State Democratic Committees. When Martin campaigned for the DNC post, he called for a 'massive narrative and branding project' to boost the party's image. As chair, he has traveled the country for canvassing, fundraisers and other events to rally Democrats, including on Saturday in New Jersey. But that work has been overshadowed in recent months by the intraparty dispute that Hogg and Martin have been locked in. Many Democrats said party officers shouldn't take sides in primaries, and Martin proposed requiring party leaders to remain neutral in them. Hogg had pitched a compromise, suggesting an internal 'firewall' that would bar him from access to sensitive information in primaries his group, Leaders We Deserve, were involved with. But Martin rejected that deal. 'Party officers have one job: to be fair stewards of a process that invites every Democrat to the table — regardless of personal views or allegiances,' Martin said, urging Hogg to stay neutral. As the controversy played out, Hogg's position in the party was separately challenged by Oklahoma DNC member Kalyn Free, who filed a complaint in February that Hogg's and Kenyatta's election in February didn't follow DNC rules and made it harder for a woman to be elected vice chair. After the DNC panel's vote in support of another election, Hogg said in a statement that it is 'impossible to ignore the broader context of my work to reform the party which loomed large over this vote' and that the 'DNC has pledged to remove me, and this vote has provided an avenue to fast-track that effort.' The tension within the DNC comes as Democrats grapple with the best way to regroup after devastating electoral losses in November. Hogg, a survivor of the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Florida, frames his efforts as a way to reinvigorate the party. Hogg previously told POLITICO 'we have a culture of seniority politics that has created a litmus test of who deserves to be here' and 'we need people, regardless of their age, that are here to fight.' He has won some influential supporters, including longtime Democratic strategist James Carville and radio host Charlamagne tha God. But an intense backlash from other Democrats has accused Hogg of hurting, not helping, the party. Several of the Democratic Party officers leveled that criticism at Hogg in their statements supporting Martin. 'Instead of helping to rebuild the party he's supposed to serve, he's attacking it for personal gain,' said Kleeb. 'That might boost his PAC's fundraising, but it erodes trust in the very institution we're trying to reform and strengthen.' Others emphasized that Hogg is an outlier among party officials, and both Appelbaum and Beatty used the word 'distraction' in their statements. 'The stakes are so high right now that we can't afford distractions like the ones that David is creating,' Appelbaum said. In the Zoom meeting, Martin appeared to acknowledge complaints some had with how the party had operated, but told Hogg the 'fight' was getting in the way. 'It has plenty of warts, and we're all trying to change those, for sure, but the longer we continue this fight, the harder it is for us to actually do what we all want to do, which is make a difference in this country again,' he said in the recording. 'I deeply respect you, David. I, too, was looking forward to working with you, but this has created a situation.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store