Indiana lawmaker files disciplinary action against state’s attorney general 

by Whitney Downard, Indiana Capital Chronicle
May 2, 2025

Indiana 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 conservativConservative 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.

Rokita weighs in on federal education moves, Indiana immigration bill

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.