Attorney General Zoeller has consistently taken the position that the Attorney General position is "unique" because of the need to "harmonize the law" among the several agencies and entities. In doing so, he has claimed he has absolute authority when it comes to deciding how legal issues involving the State of Indiana are handled. Thus, it doesn't matter if a state agency wants to settle a case, or whether the Governor wants to take a certain legal position or the General Assembly wants a law defended, the Attorney General, and only the Attorney General, gets to decide, on behalf of the State, what position will be taken. This is a position that essentially makes the Attorney General not only the attorney for the State of Indiana, but also the client.
Attorney General Greg Zoelelr
Zoeller's position regarding the authority of the Attorney General is certainly not shared by everyone. In addition to the State Senators in this case, most of the attorneys I've talked to do not agree that the Attorney General has an unfettered right to decide the State of Indiana's legal position. Rather they see the Attorney General as the attorney for the State of Indiana with a duty to follow his state client's wishes as long as they are within the ethical boundaries of legal representation. As far as multiple state agencies creating a mishmash of legal approaches, there is a singular boss of those agencies, the Governor of the State of Indiana. The AG could always appeal to the Governor to bring a consistent approach to how the agencies approach litigation.
|State Senator Mike Delph|
While that bill did not pass, a bill has been introduced in the State Senate this session that takes direct aim at addressing Zoeller's claim that unlike every other attorney in the State of Indiana, he is not obligated to actually do what his government clients want. The new language in Senate Bill 257, which is authored by Republican Delph and Steele and Democrat Timothy Lanane, states:
When the attorney general represents:While Zoeller zealously claims absolute power with regard to litigation and fends off any perceived encroachment on that absolute power, the irony is that he has no problem intruding on the turf of Governor Mike Pence. Last session a bill was introduced to give the Attorney General an office in Washington, DC where an employee of his office could lobby Congress and federal agencies. I wrote about it on my blog.
(1) the state;
(2) a state agency;
(3) a political subdivision; or
(4) any other party;
in a judicial or administrative proceeding, the attorney general owes the same obligations to that party that any other attorney owes to a client under the rules prescribed by the supreme court.
That bill, which was little more than a power grab by Zoeller, came at a curious time. The bill was introduced, no doubt at the request of Zoeller, when Governor Daniels was cleaning out his office in preparation for his new job at Purdue. Governor Pence didn't even have his administration up and running yet. It was the perfect time for another state-wide elected official to increase his power at the expense of the Governor. Fortunately, someone caught the problem and the offending lobbying language was removed.
A similar dispute over who speaks for the State of Indiana at the national level appeared to be breaking out earlier this year. Attorney Marcia Oddi, publisher of the Indiana Law Blog and who has had a long career in Indiana's executive and legislation branches, published an article titled "Ind. Gov't. - Who Speaks for Indiana at the Federal Level" on legislation that was introduced allowing the AG to place a deputy in Washington, D.C. with particular responsibilities. Her article, which also contains links to stories she wrote in 2009, 2010 and 2012 on the subject of who speaks for the State of Indiana at the federal level, identifies Senate Bill 36 as one of the bills involved in establishing the D.C. based deputy. That bill included this directive for what the responsibilities that this Deputy Attorney General would have:
State Senator Tim Lanane
1) Review and monitor legislation, regulations, administrative actions, and other activities of the federal government that may affect Indiana.(2) Take any action the attorney general finds necessary and appropriate to respond to, address, or influence any proposal, enactment, promulgation, action, order, adjudication, or activity described in subdivision (1).My reading of the highlighted language of Senate Bill 36 opens up the possibility of having the Governor and Attorney General advocating, on behalf of the State of Indiana, completely different positions as to proposed federal legislation and the promulgation of federal rules. However, this potential conflict appears to have been averted as the bill was amended in committee to eliminate the lobbying language contained in subparagraph #2 above. SB 36 is now set for third reading in the Indiana Senate
But Zoeller was not done seeking to encroach on Governor's Pence's power by asserting his right to lobby on behalf of the State of Indiana. Earlier this year he announced he was going to lobby Indiana members of Congress for more federal money for school security officers. While that may or may not be a good idea, it is not his call. It's Governor Pence's.
P.S. Thanks to the alert reader of my blog who found this bill and understood the conflict it was addressing.
Monday, December 30, 2013, Attorney General Zoeller Encroaches on Governor's Power as He Lobbies for More Federal Funding for School Resource Officers
Saturday, September 8, 2012, Republican State Senators Spar with Attorney General Over Representation in Indiana Immigration Case; AG Zoeller Claims He is Both State's Attorney and Client