Bill overhauling Marion County judicial selection committee heads to Braun’s desk

Indiana Gov. Mike Braun is expected to sign legislation recently approved by the House of Representatives that would remove the Indianapolis legal community’s input in the Marion County judicial selection process.

When a vacancy exists or will exist in Marion County courts, the Marion County judicial selection committee — a 14-member body that selects nominees for judicial vacancies — vets and interviews several candidates. The committee may then select and send three nominees to the governor, who will then choose one to fill the opening.

Under current state law — and under the original text of House Bill 1033 — four of the committee’s members are appointed by four local organizations: the Indianapolis Bar Association, the Marion County Bar Association, the Indiana Trial Lawyers Association and the Defense Trial Counsel of Indiana.

But changes made to the bill in the Senate stripped those local organizations of having a say in the matter, instead splitting their four collective appointments between the governor and the chief justice of the Indiana Supreme Court.

This means the governor will now play a two-pronged role in the process: he will be able to nominate two candidates for consideration, and he will get the final vote in who is selected.

“The reforms that we are making here are going to have a generational impact, I think, on the Marion County court,” Rep. Danny Lopez, a Carmel Republican and the bill’s author, said Thursday on the House floor.

‘Rigging the system’ 

During debate on Thursday, Rep. Ed Delaney, an Indianapolis Democrat and attorney, said the amended legislation would be “rigging the system.”

“The governor now will get to pick the people who are sent to the governor,” DeLaney said.

The Lawyer reached out to the four organizations losing representation for comment but did not receive a response before Friday’s deadline.

No clear reason has been offered for why those organizations were removed from the committee. When questioned by Rep. Mitch Gore, D-Indianapolis, during the floor debate, Lopez told his colleagues that he understood the Senate changed the committee makeup for “greater accountability” in the court, but he couldn’t formally speak to it because it was not in the original bill.

The Indiana Lawyer asked the bill’s Senate sponsor, Sen. Cyndi Carrasco, R-Indianapolis, and Lopez how those changes address “accountability” in the court. A representative for Carrasco did not immediately respond.

Lopez did not directly address the changes when reached by The Lawyer on Friday. Instead, he pointed to the other reforms laid out in the bill, specifically regarding the responsibilities and authority of the court’s executive committee, which handles administrative operations of the court, saying they are a “much-needed step toward more effective administration of the Marion County Superior Court.”

A spokesperson for Braun’s office did not respond in time for The Lawyer’s deadline.

State Rep. Gregory Porter, D-Indianapolis, expressed concerns that the updated legislation could lead to racial prejudice in the criminal justice system, calling it “judicial Jim Crow.”

“The meddling in Marion County never stops,” Porter said in a press release Thursday. “We lost the power to elect our own judges, and now we’re losing our local voices on the selection committee. This is not happening anywhere else. Whose county is next?”

The Marion County Superior Court declined to comment.

In most Indiana counties, judges run for election. But when a judicial vacancy opens in Allen, Lake, Marion or St. Joseph counties, candidates apply for the position rather than run in an election.

Sen. Lonnie Randolph, D-East Chicago, attempted to change Lake County’s selection process this session to be election-based, but his effort died in committee.

Considering diversity

With its concurrence, the House also agreed to change the criteria that the judicial selection committee shall consider when making a nomination to fill a judicial vacancy or recommending a judge’s retention.

Under the current state law, the committee must consider a candidate’s law school record and academic honors, legal experience and personality traits. It must also consider whether the candidate “reflects the diversity and makeup of Marion County.”

That requirement was also removed in the Senate this session.

In 2017, the General Assembly changed the Marion County judicial selection process after the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana ruled that the court’s former slating system was unconstitutional.

Sen. Greg Taylor, D-Indianapolis, said on Monday — during the chamber’s second reading of HB 1033 — that he remembers previously negotiating with the Legislature to ensure the selection committee considers the diverse makeup of Marion County when deciding on judicial nominees. He urged lawmakers to place the diversity consideration back into the legislation, saying removing it would be the “total opposite” of what they originally promised him they would do.

“I feel like I’m being played right now,” he said.

In response, Carrasco told her colleagues that her top priority was ensuring Marion County has the “best, the brightest and the most talented minds of judges in Marion County to make decisions that are having tremendous impact on our community.” She said nothing in the bill would prohibit the committee from considering diversity when determining the retention of a judge.

Carrasco also noted that the diversity of the Marion County courts has either stayed the same or increased since 2016, particularly regarding Black judges — 22% of Marion County judges were Black in 2016 compared to 25% in 2026. The Lawyer could not immediately and independently verify those numbers.

Taylor agreed with Carrasco’s statistical point but attributed the court’s diversity to the currently included language, which the bill removes.

The governor has three choices when he receives a bill: He can sign it into law, let it become law without his signature or veto it.