Indiana
Rokita’s office enlists DC firm to investigate if doctors misrepresent trans care risks
Indiana family advocates for 10-year-old daughter
Beth and Nathaniel Clawson are advocating for their 10-year-old daughter as Indiana passes laws targeting trans youth.
Jenna Watson, Indianapolis Star
The Indiana Attorney General’s Office has contracted with a conservative Washington D.C.-based law firm to help the state investigate claims of healthcare providers misrepresenting the risks of gender transition care and procedures to their patients of any age.
The agency, led by Attorney General Todd Rokita, signed an agreement in November with Cooper & Kirk, PLLC, which allows the firm to investigate claims of such cases for the office’s consumer protection division and to help defend the state’s existing laws on gender affirming care.
Under the contract, which runs through March 2025, Cooper & Kirk is able to investigate claims of misrepresentation tied to gender affirming care for both adults and minors, despite no state law barring any procedures or care for adults.
The contract appears to only require payment from the state if the firm helps win a case with monetary judgment. As of late January the Attorney General’s Office said it had not made any payments to the firm.
The agreement between Rokita’s office and Cooper & Kirk, which helped Indiana in its case against social media app TikTok, continues the attorney general’s recent scrutiny of healthcare organizations that provide gender affirming care to young Hoosiers in the wake of the Indiana General Assembly’s 2023 debate and ban of such care for minors.
Letters sent last March
In March 2023, as lawmakers debated the bill that would ban gender affirming care for minors, Rokita sent letters to medical facilities around the state that alleged clinics misrepresented the risks of gender transition procedures to minor patients, likening the care to child abuse.
Eskenazi Health, Indiana University Health and a clinic in Goshen — medical facilities that responded to Rokita’s request last year —were essentially subpoenaed for more information about transgender care for minors at their facilities, according to reporting by the Indiana Capital Chronicle. Indiana University Health in a statement last year told IndyStar it did not perform gender affirming surgeries on minors, but it did provide other kinds of evidence-based care to youth.
A judge in November denied an ask from those healthcare institutions to stop Rokita’s requests, known as civil investigative demands. In January, the Attorney General’s Office filed to dismiss the case after it resolved a dispute on the requested information.
From 2023: Holcomb signs bill banning transgender surgeries, puberty blockers for minors
Gender affirming care covers a range of treatments, including medical and psychological ones, that support a person’s gender identity, according to the World Health Organization.
Republican lawmakers in states around the country in recent years have taken steps to ban these types of procedures for minors, including the 2023 bill in Indiana. That law is blocked while the federal case, which is now a class action lawsuit, challenging the legislation continues.
Do providers share risks?
Rokita is not the only Republican Attorney General pursuing information about transgender medical cases. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton late last year sent letters to medical providers in Georgia and Washington seeking records of Texas minor patients who received gender affirming care, according to the Texas Tribune. Seattle Children’s Hospital sued the Texas Attorney General’s Office in December to block release of that information.
A spokesperson for Rokita’s office told IndyStar in December that the agency is concerned about gender transition procedures and whether patients, both minors and adults, could be “deceived, abused or treated unfairly by medical providers.”
The spokesperson, who did not provide examples, said “it has been publicly reported” that medical providers prescribe “puberty blockers, sex hormones and surgeries” to patients without disclosing risks.
When asked whether Indiana has received allegations of medical providers failing to disclose risks of gender affirming care, the spokesperson directed IndyStar to file a public records request.
A national group of scientists and medical providers focused on treatment and research tied to hormones told IndyStar there are clear guidelines for practitioners that emphasize the importance of fully informing patients about the side effects of gender affirming care.
The Endocrine Society in a statement said it has a clinical practice guideline for health professionals with recommendations stating that transgender and gender-diverse adolescents should be “informed fully” about risks before care, citing the potential for adverse effects on fertility preservation options as examples of what patients can experience.
“The Society’s Clinical Practice Guideline recommends proceeding with treatment as conservatively as possible to give transgender and gender-diverse youth and their parents time to consider their options,” The Endocrine Society said.
Cooper & Kirk cases
The Cooper & Kirk law firm is not new to work with the Indiana Attorney General’s Office nor legal efforts critical of transgender people.
Cooper & Kirk attorneys in 2023 filed a lawsuit on behalf of parents at a Virginia Beach school to force the district to comply with the state’s Republican governor’s policies on limiting accommodations for transgender students, according to the Associated Press.
The firm dropped the lawsuit in October after the school district voted for rules that align with the governor’s requirements, the AP reported.
The law firm has three active contracts with the Indiana Attorney General’s Office, including the contract on investigating gender affirming care cases. The other contracts are tied to Rokita’s lawsuit against TikTok and a general agreement with the firm to help the state in general litigation matters.
The Attorney General’s Office has not had to make any payments to Cooper & Kirk for any of the current contracts. Under the TikTok and gender affirming care contracts, the law firm would receive a certain percentage of any monetary judgments it helps the state win in legal cases, starting at 25% of any dollar amount recovered between $2 million and $10 million.
Rokita sued TikTok in 2022 over allegations the app does not protect children from mature content and that it deceives users about the Chinese government’s ability to access data. The case was dismissed by a state superior court judge in November.
In 2023: Indiana judge tosses out Todd Rokita’s lawsuit of ‘hyperbolic allegations’ against TikTok
The attorney general’s office’s contract with Cooper & Kirk plans for the law firm to help defend the state’s ban on gender-affirming care for minors. The state continues to defend the law against a legal challenge brought by the ACLU of Indiana.
The ACLU filed the lawsuit in April just hours after Gov. Eric Holcomb signed the bill into law. A federal judge temporarily blocked portions of the law in June through an injunction that states Indiana is unable to prohibit treatments for minors while the lawsuit is ongoing. The judge in January approved making the case a class action lawsuit.
As of late January, a trial on the lawsuit is scheduled for April 2025.
IndyStar archives contributed to this story. Contact IndyStar’s state government and politics reporter Brittany Carloni at brittany.carloni@indystar.com or 317-779-4468. Follow her on Twitter/X @CarloniBrittany.
Gov. Mike Braun asked state regulators to reconsider their decision to greenlight a $71 million rate increase for AES Indiana, doubling down on his condemnation of a move that could leave Indianapolis residents with higher electrical bills for years.
Braun wrote in a June 18 news release that he had asked Indiana Utility Counselor Abby Gray, who heads the office representing ratepayers in proceedings before the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission, to petition for a rehearing of the AES rate case.
Gray indicated in the release that her office would submit the petition shortly. No petition had been posted on the IURC’s online docket as of this story’s publication.
The rate increase, which was approved by the IURC on June 17, was substantially less than the $192 million increase that AES initially requested. It was also less than the amount proposed in a settlement last October between AES and major electricity consumers.
But the Office of Utility Consumer Counselor, which Gray leads, came out strongly against any increase to AES’s base rates. In September, the OUCC called for a $21 million reduction instead.
As the Republican Party grapples with rising discontent over affordability, Braun has used opposition to rising utility rates to telegraph that he’s committed to keeping costs down for Indiana residents. He signed a law in February that allows the state to make rate-setting decisions that reward or penalize utilities based on metrics including affordability.
In March, he told reporters that he would take on Indiana’s five investor-owned utilities, describing himself as the “new sheriff in town.”
And after the IURC voted 3-1 to approve the AES rate increase, he wrote in a post to X that he was “deeply disappointed.”
Braun wrote in the June 18 news release that he had appointed Gray, a longtime OUCC lawyer and judge, to her current post because he knew she “would help me fight for Hoosiers.”
According to AES’s estimates, the rate increase will cost households an additional $5 per month for every 1,000 kilowatt hours of electricity they use, beginning in July. A second hike will take effect in January.
Tilly Robinson is a Pulliam fellow for the Indianapolis Star. She can be reached at tilly.robinson@indystar.com.
The Protect College Sports Act, legislation meant to introduce and codify sweeping reforms related to college athletics, passed out of the Senate Commerce Committee on Thursday morning.
It now heads to the Senate floor.
The bill passed out of committee by a 19-9 vote. Indiana Republican Sen. Todd Young voted no, his decision reflecting Big Ten concerns over the bill.
A spokesman for Sen. Young told IndyStar, “Senator Young hopes that additional changes can be made to the bill to address concerns raised by the Big Ten.”
Co-sponsored by Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Maria Cantwell (D-Washington), the Protect College Sports Act represents Congress’ most substantial success so far in a yearslong effort to bring legislative reform to college athletics. Since before the COVID-19 pandemic, leaders in college sports — including the NCAA, member conferences and schools, and other major players — have lobbied for national solutions to what have become state and regional problems.
Several pieces of legislation have been introduced across the last several years, only to fizzle long before reaching the floor of either chamber. The SCORE Act, introduced last year in the House of Representatives, gained some traction and passed out of committee, but was never brought to the floor.
Which makes Thursday’s news meaningful. Moving the Protect College Sports Act to the Senate floor, while not a guarantee of any outcome, potentially takes the bill past a threshold no other such piece of reformative legislation has yet been able to cross.
Cruz told Yahoo! Sports’ Ross Dellenger on Thursday that Cruz believes Sen. Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) is committed to introducing the bill to the Senate floor soon.
The bill provides a legal framework for a host of potential reforms and protections for college sports. It grants limited antitrust protection to the NCAA, places limits on certain things including potential conference realignment, builds safeguards meant to protect non-revenue and Olympic sports, addresses potential broadcast rights reforms, and more.
It enjoys significant backing, and not just among leaders in college sports. This week, the NFL, its players’ association, the National Basketball Players Association and Major League Baseball all voiced their support for the bill.
Two key constituencies not in lockstep on the bill voiced their own concerns Thursday.
In a joint statement issued just after 10 a.m. Thursday, the Big Ten and SEC — far and away the two most powerful conferences and arguably two greatest power centers, full stop, in college athletics — suggested they still hold significant reservations over the bill.
“From the outset, we identified a set of essential revisions to the PCSA necessary for the long-term sustainability of college athletics,” the statement read. “We have worked with both majority and minority staff to advance those revisions, which focus on better supporting student-athletes and stabilizing the college sports environment. We continue to believe revisions are needed to secure our support for the bill.
“Despite our sustained engagement and good faith efforts, these critical revisions have not been accepted.”
The statement went on to note the “several Commerce Committee members that share our concerns and support these recommendations.”
Young is one of several members of the committee representing a Big Ten state, including one of three Republicans. He is the only Republican member of the committee whose state contains multiple schools in the conference.
Allowing for those reservations, Thursday’s news is still significant. It marks the first time a bipartisan bill on the subject has reached this point in the Senate and, should it be brought to the floor, it would be the first such legislation to reach that stage, in either chamber.
The bill could be brought to the Senate floor as early as July, though that timeline remains fluid.
(INDIANA CAPITAL CHRONICLE) – The Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission voted 3-1 Wednesday to approve a $71 million electricity rate increase for AES Indiana customers.
That is about 37% of what the utility initially requested and lower than a settlement agreement proposed in October.
Neither Gov. Mike Braun nor consumer advocates are happy with the outcome.
“My top priority is affordability, which is why I am deeply disappointed by the IURC’s approval of another AES rate increase,” he said. “Hoosiers have spent years tightening their belts and making tough financial decisions. It’s time for utility companies to do the same.”
Members of the commission didn’t explain their votes Wednesday. IURC Chair Andy Zay focused his remarks on the process.
“There’s a lot of eyes on this order and what we’re doing today,” he said. “What is before you on the floor is a nearly a year’s worth of work, evidence, deliberations, and considerations that bring us to this moment in this decision. None of this was taken lightly. I want to thank my colleagues for the patience and working through this amongst the auspice of affordability, which is certainly a hot topic now, as well as the resiliency, reliability that we see in this increased demand in electricity.”
The Office of Utility Consumer Counselor last year recommended that state regulators deny AES Indiana’s request for a $193 million base rate increase — instead proposing a $21 million reduction in current rates.
“The AES rate order issued today is an outrage and Hoosiers deserve better!” Counselor Abby Gray said in a statement Wednesday. “Governor Braun has made it clear that ratepayer affordability is a priority, far more than just a ‘hot topic’ as described by the chairman of the IURC today. This order fails the governor’s call to overhaul how utilities are regulated in order to lower bills for ratepayers.”
Gray’s office represents Hoosier ratepayers in regulatory cases.
“The order approves a substantial profit margin for shareholders in addition to a rate increase for customers,” she continued. “It even requires ratepayers to pay approximately $3 million to AES lawyers and experts.”
AES Indiana provides electricity service to about 490,000 homes and businesses in Indianapolis and some nearby areas.
The utility originally sought $193 million in rate increases. The previously proposed settlement agreement dropped that to $91 million, while the final, approved settlement agreement lands at $71 million.
Three IURC members supported the increase: Zay, David Veleta and David Ziegner.
Commissioner Bob Deig voted no. A fifth member, Anthony Swinger, recused himself because he worked on the case previously when he was on the consumer counselor’s office staff.
Ben Inskeep, program director for ratepayer advocacy group Citizens Action Coalition, said utilities across the country often ask for a larger increase than they need, knowing that regulators will disallow “roughly half” of it.
“The latest AES Indiana fuel adjustment clause proceeding shows AES Indiana is actually not only earning all of their allowed profit but over-earning by $19 million their return amount,” he said. “They’re already extremely financially successful at this moment in time, so it’s rather bizarre to even get an extra $71 million dollars approved here.”
Inskeep also noted that the increases will fall disproportionately on residential customers over commercial and industrial users.
Brandi Davis-Handy, president of AES Indiana, said the company has maintained some of the lowest rates in the state for more than a decade “through disciplined planning and a focus on efficiency. We applied the same approach here by working closely with stakeholders to make balanced decisions that keep the system reliable, limit customer impact, and align with the state’s energy pillars.”
AES said for a typical residential customer using 1,000 kilowatt-hours per month, the increase will be less than $5 per month per phase. Phase one rates will be implemented in July 2026 and phase two rates will be implemented in January 2027.
The final order says the utility “will not seek to implement a change in basic rates and charges as a result of its next base rate case before January 1, 2030.”
A new law, however, requires all utilities to file a multi-year rate case in 2029, though implementation wouldn’t happen until 2030.
-
San Francisco, CA7 minutes agoOakland man faces hate crime charges for Castro District attack
-
Dallas, TX10 minutes agoAt least 4 injured after vehicle drives into Dallas crowd, driver arrested
-
Miami, FL15 minutes agoMiami Central students prepare for life changing trip to Zimbabwe amid funding challenges
-
Boston, MA22 minutes agoGiannis to Boston is a possibility. Should the Knicks be worried?
-
Denver, CO25 minutes agoDenver Public Schools’ decline in enrollment continues to reshape district
-
Seattle, WA30 minutes agoWoo twirls 7 scoreless innings in bounceback outing vs. Orioles
-
San Diego, CA37 minutes agoNASCAR makes history with inaugural Naval Base Coronado race
-
Milwaukee, WI39 minutes agoStolen Oak Creek couple’s car found by viewer dumped near Milwaukee apartment complex
