Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
As the attorney for the state of Indiana, Attorney General Todd Rokita and his deputies serve as counsel to statewide elected officials, state legislators, state agencies and 91 county prosecutors. The breadth and scope of this representation is staggering and sometimes lost, even on our own legal community.
This is unfortunate considering my daily observations of dedication and excellence exuded by the over 150 attorneys who work for the office and prosecute, defend and candidly advise in furtherance of a shared purpose—to do justice for Indiana and plainly be the best advocates for our fellow Hoosiers in state government. Letting others know about our good work and expanding the understanding of our role in state governmental affairs is one of the best parts of my job.
Recently, some have expressed concerns over an advisory opinion we issued, which the attorney general discussed at a press conference. As routinely happens, one of our elected officials, State Sen. Andy Zay, requested the opinion to clarify whether terminated pregnancy reports are confidential.
Given the questions over the press conference and my clear affinity for the office’s work, I did not want to miss the opportunity to discuss why we have an Advisory Division within the Attorney General’s Office in the first place.
It has long been the practice of state attorneys general offices across our nation to issue advisory opinions. The same is true for our federal attorney general office in Washington, which also releases official opinions under its Office of Legal Counsel. You see, our office advises and at times does so in a very public way.
The advisory opinion at issue, like many before it, was the result of work undertaken by several attorneys. The opinion concludes that TPRs are not confidential and quite reasonably advises the releasing state agency of a middle ground—to release the TPR and redact anything that reasonably could be used to identify a particular patient. This approach would address patient privacy concerns particularly where the intent of the legislature is to monitor the procedure, not the patient.
Ultimately, the opinion does what lawyers normally do. It renders candid advice on how to mitigate the risk of a lawsuit. At the press conference, prompted by questions from participants, the attorney general in his direct and unvarnished manner expressed as much, noting that a failure to heed the office’s advice could result in litigation in the form of a lawsuit against the state.
Advisory opinions serve an essential function and provide public officials a correct, legal interpretation of the law. Additionally, a question may be presented to assist a state official in determining a policy choice or future course of action. As noted by the attorney general, advisory opinions serve to help protect public officials from legal liability and lawsuits that could result from an incorrect interpretation of the law.
Of course, our Advisory Division renders sound legal advice in many other settings — at state administrative board hearings, through informal phone calls with local officials, and through careful review of state legal contracts and administrative rules.
The work is ongoing and amazingly diverse, which at times means it’s challenging and may draw scrutiny. We should be grateful for the lawyers who work in these roles. It’s an important undertaking that in the best circumstances helps government function efficiently for Hoosiers.
Finally, I’d be remiss if I did not let you know that during the Rokita administration, the office has done the difficult work to digitize and offer an online database of the office’s advisory opinions from the 1920s to today. We continue working to upload opinions dating back to 1873.
This database, which is publicly available, is a fascinating rabbit hole for the historically inclined among us and contains many opinions providing guidance to state agencies over the proper interpretation of the law. A review of these many digitized opinions will reflect that the office has often had occasion to correct a misinterpretation of an agency or official. In other words, this has happened before.
As it has for many decades, the Advisory Division of the Attorney General’s Office will continue to help the State of Indiana follow sound legal precepts for the benefit of all Hoosiers as we all work together to build a better, stronger Indiana.•
__________
Cory Voight is a assistant chief deputy in the Office of Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.