ILNews

Senate confirms Indy lawyer as new U.S. Attorney

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

An Indianapolis lawyer has gotten approval to become the next U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Indiana, ending a three-year gap since last time a U.S. Senate confirmed leader held that post.

After a full day of business Wednesday, the Senate at about 1:30 a.m. Thursday unanimously confirmed the nomination of Joseph H. Hogsett, who is a senior partner at law firm Bingham McHale. The president had chosen him for the top prosecutor spot back in July. The Senate Judiciary Committee approved his nomination Sept. 16 and Hogsett was one of six U.S. Attorneys confirmed by the full Senate just before it left for a midterm election break.

Hogsett Joe Hogsett

The last confirmed leader was Susan Brooks, who left in October 2007 to take a general counsel spot at Ivy Tech Community College. Longtime second-in-command and previous interim leader Tim Morrison took over that role until a new nominee could be found.

Indiana’s Democratic Sen. Evan Bayh had recommended Hogsett, who’s previously served as chief of staff and senior advisor to Bayh during his governorship in the 1990s. Hogsett also had been the Secretary of State and the state Democratic Party chairman for several years.

Practicing law since 1981, the Indiana University Maurer School of Law – Bloomington graduate has been with Bingham McHale since leaving public service work in the late '90s. He now handles individual employment contracts, non-compete agreements, sexual harassment and retaliation claims, and immigration compliance, and he defends businesses in employment discrimination and civil rights litigation at the state and federal levels. He also assists the firm’s government department in advising Hoosier cities, towns, and counties on various issues.

Attending a retirement ceremony this morning for Indiana Supreme Court Justice Theodore R. Boehm, the newly confirmed Hogsett received congratulations from those in the legal community and was acknowledged during remarks from the bench. Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard introduced those in the audience and included Morrison as the acting U.S. Attorney, but pointed out the “good news is that help is on the way” with Hogsett’s recent confirmation.

After hearing the news today, Hogsett confined most of his remarks to a release sent out this morning from Bingham McHale. But he told Indiana Lawyer that he hopes the president will sign his commission soon so that he can be sworn in by U.S. District Court Chief Judge Richard Young in the next week or so.

In the release, Hogsett vowed that the Southern District will approach legal issues with a “renewed sense of commitment and priority, with vigilance and timeliness.”

“Criminal wrongdoing will be sought out wherever it is to be found - whether in our neighborhoods or in corporate boardrooms, whether perpetrated by the famous or unknown - and these individuals will be identified, investigated, and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law,” he said.

This is the second new U.S. Attorney the state has had confirmed recently, with senators late last year confirming second-in-command David Capp to lead the office in the Northern District that he’d been filling on an interim basis since 2007 when Joseph Van Bokkelen was named to the federal bench.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  2. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  3. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

  4. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

  5. Seventh Circuit Court Judge Diane Wood has stated in “The Rule of Law in Times of Stress” (2003), “that neither laws nor the procedures used to create or implement them should be secret; and . . . the laws must not be arbitrary.” According to the American Bar Association, Wood’s quote drives home this point: The rule of law also requires that people can expect predictable results from the legal system; this is what Judge Wood implies when she says that “the laws must not be arbitrary.” Predictable results mean that people who act in the same way can expect the law to treat them in the same way. If similar actions do not produce similar legal outcomes, people cannot use the law to guide their actions, and a “rule of law” does not exist.

ADVERTISEMENT