Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita has expanded his unconventional use of civil investigative demands to Fort Wayne as part of an ongoing effort to uncover information about the potential labor trafficking of undocumented immigrants.
The move comes even as his office has lost one court battle in Evansville over the use of these civil subpoenas in immigration-related cases and faced intense questioning about the approach in a deposition for a federal lawsuit in Indianapolis that challenges his tactics.
His push into Fort Wayne began in mid-November, bringing the number of businesses and organizations that have now received the civil subpoenas, known as CIDs, to at least 16 over the past year.
CIDs are typically used in fraud and consumer protection cases. Rokita is instead deploying them to gather information about how employers, service providers, and local governments interact with immigrants, arguing that those interactions may contribute to labor trafficking.
“The investigations aim to address multiple facets of illegal immigration, including the role of corporate and nonprofit entities in facilitating the mass movement of migrants, with the goal of eliminating associated problems like labor trafficking,” a Rokita spokesperson told The Indiana Lawyer last week.
The office said the CIDs were issued to organizations in areas with “elevated migration levels resulting from Biden-era policies.”
The attorney general’s aggressive measures have prompted a mix of responses from the numerous businesses and nonprofits that were served with CIDs.
Rokita said some organizations, like Amani Family Services and Catholic Charities Fort Wayne South Bend, have vowed they would cooperate with his office’s requests for immigration-related information.
But other groups have strongly pushed back against Rokita.
In addition to losing a court case in Evansville over the use of immigration-related CIDs, Rokita’s office also faces a federal lawsuit from Exodus Refugee Immigration Inc., which serves the resettlement needs of refugees seeking to locate in Indiana.
The organization has sued Rokita’s office for being subjected to a civil subpoena that it contends violates its constitutional rights and for allegations that the group’s Bloomington office may have been involved with “possible interference with federal immigration activities.”
Rokita and his office have repeatedly insisted that the CIDs are not accusations of wrongdoing but fact-finding inquiries designed to get information about potential labor trafficking from entities that interact with immigrants.
Ken Falk, who is representing Exodus Refugee as the legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana, said Exodus is being retaliated against by Rokita’s office for the constitutionally-protected services it provides to immigrants looking to resettle in the U.S.
That retaliation, Falk contends, is being carried out through an overreach of a CID process not designed for immigration-related uses.
“Here we’re broadening that immensely, and that’s a problem,” Falk said.
How it started
Rokita first announced the use of CIDs for immigration-related inquiries more than a year ago, when he sent civil subpoenas to the Cass County Health Department, Logansport Community School Corp., Amcor, Tent Partnership for Refugees, God is Good, and the Jackson County Industrial Development Corp.
Since then, other businesses and nonprofits around the state have received similar requests.
Amcor and The Haitian Center of Evansville successfully challenged the attorney general’s CIDs in court.
In the Evansville case, Vanderburgh Circuit Court Judge Robert Pigman wrote that Rokita’s investigative demands did not meet the statutory standard of reasonable cause and relevancy.
“There simply is not sufficient facts to infer reasonable cause exists to believe the Petitioners have relevant information to an investigation for labor trafficking,” Pigman wrote.
CIDs allow the attorney general to compel documents and testimony before filing a lawsuit. Rokita’s office has maintained that CIDs are not public records under Indiana’s Access to Public Records Act. But The Lawyer has obtained and reviewed CIDs that Rokita has sent to The Haitian Center and Exodus Refugee.
Both request similar information, including details about any programs designed to help with the entry or settlement of migrants and any financial assistance or other benefits offered to encourage that process.
But Exodus Refugee has been asked to provide much more information about its written and oral communications concerning ICE and any changes made in Exodus’ operations, including shutting down its office and instructing staff or immigrants to avoid the organization’s facilities. It also has been asked to “identify and describe any and all instances in which Exodus Refugee attempted to stop, interfere with, impede, or frustrate the work of ICE or ICE operations.”
The attorney general’s office also directed Exodus to produce documents regarding the organization’s awareness of ICE’s presence and/or operations in Monroe County between April 10 and May 15.
At the time he announced the Exodus Refugee CID, Rokita alleged that officials with ICE informed his office that a recent ICE operation in Monroe County faced numerous challenges as a result of what may have been a coordinated effort by entities in Bloomington to help undocumented immigrants evade apprehension.
In its lawsuit against Rokita, filed in the U.S. District Court in Indianapolis shortly after his announcement, Exodus argued that the CID that Rokita directed to Exodus “probes every aspect of Exodus’s services by demanding answers to extensive interrogatories and seeking an overwhelming array of documents covering virtually everything Exodus does.”
The organization alleged the CID is unconstitutional and sought to compel Exodus to disclose an enormous amount of information that is clearly protected by the First Amendment—”including information about persons with whom Exodus associates in furtherance of its protected activities.”
AG’s office deposed
In a petition to enforce its CID against Exodus, filed in October, the attorney general’s office alleged that Exodus may have directed all of its staff at its Bloomington location to work remotely on the days during which ICE was known to be engaged in an April enforcement operation in the Bloomington area and may also have told its migrant clients not to come to Exodus’s office during that time.
“ICE noted to OAG that, in ICE’s view, such communications by Exodus to its staff and clients may indicate that Exodus employs and/or provides services to illegal aliens,” according to the petition.
The state alleged Exodus may have violated Indiana’s nonprofit statute and False Claims Act as a result.
The ACLU deposed Joby Jerrells, chief counsel of the attorney general office’s advisory division, on Nov. 6 as part of Exodus’ federal lawsuit challenging the CID.
Jerrells confirmed the attorney general’s office learned of the Monroe County ICE operation through a phone call from a federal agent, who said the operation was less successful than expected after the community appeared to be alerted.
He testified that multiple organizations were mentioned during that call, but only Exodus received a CID, to his knowledge.
He also acknowledged that organizations may lawfully educate immigrants about their rights, including explaining when ICE agents need a judicial warrant.
The chief counsel also testified that Rokita’s office had issued 16 CIDs to “organizations that serve either refugee or immigrant companies or companies that the attorney general believes may employ refugees or immigrants or civil IDs that are in the attorney general’s estimation designed to address issues around immigration.”
That’s compared to “hundreds” of CIDs the state has issued in that timeframe, mostly through the consumer protection division, Jerrells said.
He also said that only one news release has been issued by the attorney general regarding a non-immigration CID in the past year. That compares with three news releases and one news conference on immigration-related CIDs in the same period.
Jerrells acknowledged that no criminal, civil or administrative proceedings have arisen from the 16 immigration-related CIDs.
Fort Wayne response
Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Fort Wayne–South Bend confirmed that it had received a CID from Rokita’s office.
On its website, the organization stated it is reviewing the request and “vehemently condemns any person or organization involved in any form of trafficking.”
“As an organization that provides programming for survivors of trafficking through trauma counseling and intensive case management, we look forward to responding to the CID and working with the Attorney General’s office to ensure that trafficking has no place in America or in our community,” the organization’s statement read.
In a Nov. 14 Facebook post, Rokita responded: “We appreciate Catholic Charities willingness to cooperate. We look forward to reviewing their response to our CID.”
David Bethuram, executive director of Catholic Charities’ Indianapolis location, told The Lawyer that his office has not received a CID from Rokita’s office.
At his November press conference in Fort Wayne, Rokita said his office was investigating alleged labor trafficking and blamed the Biden Administration for what he described as opening the country’s borders and bringing undocumented immigrants that have displaced American workers.
“Employers and nonprofits that encourage or incentivize the mass movement of alien workers to fill jobs should not be surprised that their movement of workers is going to come under scrutiny by me,” Rokita said.
In explaining his rationale for issuing the civil subpoenas, Rokita added that he was not saying at the time that the employers or nonprofits receiving CIDs in the Fort Wayne were involved in labor trafficking, but that they were “uniquely contributing to conditions where labor trafficking may be more likely to occur.”
He said he believed Amani Family Services, Catholic Charities Fort Wayne South Bend and Amazon had vital information to give his office to help root out labor trafficking in the area.
Amani had expressed a willingness to cooperate, Rokita said.
Rokita said he also wants to determine whether Fort Wayne city government’s policies violate the state’s ban on sanctuary cities.
Rokita said he became concerned about Fort Wayne’s policies when he learned of a “Certified Welcoming” designation from the national organization Welcoming America.
However, the nonprofit lists Allen County, not the city of Fort Wayne, as one of its Certified Welcoming designees on its website.
The national group describes Certified Welcoming as a formal designation for cities and counties that have created policies and programs reflecting their values and commitment to immigrant inclusion.
John Perlich, a spokesman in the Fort Wayne mayor’s office, said in an email to The Lawyer that the city is in discussions with the attorney general’s office regarding the scope of the city’s response to a CID and would fulfill its legal obligations.
“We are not a sanctuary city and have never been one. Fort Wayne also does not have the “Certified Welcoming” designation that is conveyed by the national organization Welcoming America,” Perlich said.
Emily Almodovar, the Allen County Board of Commissioners’ public information officer, said there is an application process involved with earning the Welcoming America designation and a government entity has to serve as a lead agency for the process.
She said Fort Wayne had originally pursued the designation but decided not to continue the process. Allen County assumed the role of lead agency in what Almodovar called a rigorous application process spanning two years, with Welcoming America interviewing more than 30 community agencies.
When Allen County commissioners read the words “refugees” and “immigrants,” they view those as people who are in the U.S. legally, Almodovar stressed.
She said northeast Indiana has long been a place where immigrant communities have settled, whether it be Laotians when she was in high school or Burmese immigrants in more recent times.
“Fort Wayne and Allen County have been relocation areas longer than I’ve been alive,” Almodovar said.
Other states
Indiana is not the only state where a conservative Republican attorney general with a focus on immigration reform has turned to CIDs. But it is one place where the practice has generated significant litigation.
Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway announced Nov. 25 that her office had launched a formal investigation into Advanced Micro Targeting Inc., a Dallas, Texas-based signature-gathering group operating in Missouri.
The Missouri attorney general alleged that the company had violated multiple Missouri laws by using undocumented immigrants in connection with its petition signature efforts and failed to disclose workers’ ineligible status to clients. AMT could not immediately be reached for comment.
Isabelle Bryson, deputy director of communications with the Missouri Attorney General’s Office, said in an email to The Lawyer that the office has utilized CIDs in 2025 for matters that involve deception, fraud, and unfair practices involving undocumented immigrants or those not authorized to work in Missouri.
“It is not the first time, and it is one of the Attorney General’s Office’s tools to address unfair, illegal, and abusive business practices,” Bryson said.
Some Missouri organizations and businesses that have been served with CIDS are cooperating with the state, Bryson said.
She said she was not aware of any court challenges to any of the state’s civil subpoenas related to possible illegal immigration and she noted that the state “had received useful information in this process.”•
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.