Bill to add judges in a few counties advances, but plan to cut elsewhere still unclear

  • Print
Listen to this story

Subscriber Benefit

As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
0:00
0:00
Loading audio file, please wait.
  • 0.25
  • 0.50
  • 0.75
  • 1.00
  • 1.25
  • 1.50
  • 1.75
  • 2.00
The Indiana Statehouse in downtown Indianapolis (IL file photo)

A bill that would add two superior courts in Hamilton County and magistrates in two other counties was unanimously approved Tuesday afternoon by the House Ways and Means Committee.

But an emerging plan to cut judge positions in other counties to make the proposal cost neutral has yet to be worked out.

House Bill 1144 is a response to statistics from the state’s weighted caseload management system, which shows growing Hamilton County as having the greatest need for additional judges.

It says Hamilton County has 11 judicial officers but needs 15.

The bill calls for two new Hamilton Superior Court judges to be elected by November 2026. It would also allow Hamilton County judges to appoint two additional magistrates.

Rep. Chris Jeter, the bill’s author and a Fishers Republican, said if the increase in the Hamilton County caseload continues at its current pace for the next two years, the county will still have the greatest need for more judges even after adding four more judicial officers.

The bill was amended in committee to also add more judicial officers for Elkhart and Vigo counties. Elkhart County judges would be allowed to appoint five full-time magistrates and Vigo County judges could appoint one magistrate.

Vigo County is listed as number three in need of judicial officers. It has seven but needs about nine. Elkhart County is eighth with 11 judicial officers and a need of about 13.

Rep. Jack Jordan, R-Bremen, asked Jeter how lawmakers would determine which counties would lose judges to counter additions elsewhere.

Jeter responded said they are going to look at counties where populations shrunk and are a little heavy on judicial officers.

“We’re going to try to, going forward, make this kind of a cost-neutral type of approach. I think the importance is in how we do that humanely for judges that are on the bench and have terms and so we’re going to try to work through that,” Jeter said. “I think it’s a hard but important step to get things right.”

Jeter did not specify what counties would see cuts. The weighted caseload management system could provide some clues.

It shows that Blackford, Franklin, Brown and Union counties have the least utilized judicial capacity. But Union only has one judge, so it would be difficult to cut there.

The other three counties each have two judicial officers and show a need for slightly less than one.

Marion County also could be a target. It has 84 judicial officers but only needs 73, according to the caseload management system.

The bill will now head to the full House for consideration.

Please enable JavaScript to view this content.

{{ articles_remaining }}
Free {{ article_text }} Remaining
{{ articles_remaining }}
Free {{ article_text }} Remaining Article limit resets on
{{ count_down }}