Stay ahead of the curve as a political insider with deep policy analysis, daily briefings and policy-shaping tools.
Request a DemoBringing back barnstorming: Curtis Hill and his run for governor
A week after Hamas attacked Israel, Chris Just attached American and Israeli flags to the back of his Gladiator and drove to the second-annual Central Indy Jeep N’Vasion at the Johnson County Fairgrounds.
Wind blew over tents, and grim clouds approached. There, in Franklin on Oct. 14, 2023, a volunteer with former state Attorney General Curtis Hill’s gubernatorial campaign approached Just. Asked if his vote was already decided, Just said he hadn’t thought about it yet: “I know I’ll vote Republican, but I just don’t know who.” (Four years ago, Just voted for Libertarian Donald Rainwater after losing faith in Gov. Eric Holcomb.)
The volunteer brought over Hill, who introduced himself to Just. The two chatted about Jeeps, the event and topics unrelated to politics. After several minutes, Hill and Just posed for a picture in front of the Gladiator — flags prominently displayed behind them. “It gave me an introduction to who he was,” Just told State Affairs.
Presumptive voters like Just are the Hoosiers Hill’s campaign hopes to sway ahead of the May 7 primary. Polling in single digits, Hill will likely need them to prevail. In the six-candidate race, he has placed fifth in every poll conducted this year. And Hill has spent only a fraction (about $290,000) of the millions spent by other wealthy, self-funded candidates through the first three months of 2024.
In absence of the same financial treasures enjoyed by his opponents, Hill’s campaign has adopted a different approach, shunning pricey TV ads in favor of in-person events. His campaign chair since November, Jackie Horvath, said Hill, 63, flourishes in front of crowds. “Whether it be in front of thousands or in front of hundreds or tens or one-on-one, he just has that gift,” she said. Lincoln Day Dinners, for example, have been staples for the campaign, which believes enough voters will be convinced of Hill’s message to make traversing the state worth it. “You just have to be more targeted,” Horvath said.
Ahead of the primary, Hill has already earned political victories. In January, he was the first to call for the Indiana Department of Health to resume releasing terminated pregnancy reports to the public. The department had halted their release, arguing the individual reports could be reverse-engineered to identify women who have had an abortion. (The department still shares quarterly roundups with aggregate data of the individual reports.)
Hill, in a news release, said the department was “arrogantly disregarding the law” and its decision “directly contradicts the previous treatment” of the reports. He insists releasing them is the only way to ensure the state’s near-total abortion ban can be enforced.
Attorney General Todd Rokita’s office earlier this month issued an official opinion contending individual abortion reports are not medical records and can be released to the public. In a news conference announcing the opinion, Rokita credited Hill for highlighting the issue. Hill’s former opponent said voters should ask other gubernatorial candidates “where they stand on this.” During an April 23 debate, other Republican candidates said they would push for the reports to be released after Hill questioned them.
And in February, Hill implored Holcomb to deploy Indiana National Guard members to Texas, as more than a dozen other states have done. Days later, Holcomb committed to sending 50 members. He justified the decision by blaming the federal government for not properly enforcing immigration law at the border with Mexico.
Yet, despite his continued influence on Indiana politics, Hill has struggled to win over Republican voters.
“He’s kind of like that pain in your side that just won’t go away for Republicans, and I wonder if his campaign is more about spite than anything else,” said Julia Vaughn, executive director of Common Cause Indiana, a nonpartisan organization that advocates for transparent governance.
The fall
Perry Township Republicans held a Lincoln Day Dinner April 2 at The Atrium, an unassuming banquet and catering facility tucked away in a strip mall off of Thompson Road in Indianapolis. U.S. Rep. Jim Banks was scheduled to be the featured speaker, and the event drew many of the state’s most notable conservatives.
Before the dinner started, Hill told State Affairs he doesn’t believe Hoosiers want “elite candidates.” He believes there is still a place for barnstorming around the state and delivering a message in person.
In 2016, Hill was elected state attorney general. Before that, he spent 14 years as the elected prosecutor for Elkhart County, where he was born and raised. The youngest of five children, Hill earned a Bachelor of Science in marketing and a Doctor of Jurisprudence at Indiana University, where he met his wife, Teresa, according to his campaign website. They are now parents of five.
During his time as attorney general, Hill was a champion of socially conservative causes, taking to Fox News to opine on national anthem protests, crime and homelessness in San Francisco. Many considered him a “rising star” in the Republican ranks.
But Hill’s once-promising political career derailed when the Indiana Supreme Court suspended his law license for groping four women at a party marking the end of the 2018 legislative session.
The court found “by clear and convincing evidence that [Hill] committed the criminal act of battery” against three female legislative staffers — ages 23 to 26 at the time — and a Democratic legislator. Hill has maintained his innocence, saying he never inappropriately touched the women.
Prior to the court’s decision, a special prosecutor declined to file criminal charges against Hill. The women filed a civil lawsuit in July 2020, claiming Hill committed battery against them. In early April, a Marion County judge called off a jury trial for the case, which remains pending. (Attorneys representing the women did not respond to a State Affairs request for comment.)
Following the state Supreme Court’s decision, Democrats and many Republicans — including Holcomb — called for Hill’s resignation. But Hill did not resign. Instead, he fulfilled his term and lost a close 2020 Republican attorney general nomination to Rokita.
Hill has since kept a mostly low profile. His most notable foray came in 2022, when he launched an unsuccessful bid to replace the late U.S. Rep. Jackie Walorski. (He lost to U.S. Rep. Rudy Yakym, who was backed by Walorski’s family.) In 2022, Hill was also supposed to be involved in a mock trial of Dr. Anthony Fauci, the former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Hill said an episode was filmed, but technical difficulties caused it to “fizzle out.”
Hill has kept busy with his namesake law practice and a consulting business, Maverick Consulting LLC. He has worked with the anti-vaccine nonprofit Children’s Health Defense and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as a consultant on “some post-pandemic matters.” And he participated in a senior fellowship at the conservative-leaning think tank Center for Urban Renewal and Education.
When he spends the weekend at home, Hill tries to make time for tennis with friends. They call themselves the Brandy Boys. Their Saturday routine: tennis, then breakfast and “a celebratory bottle of brandy that goes a long way.”
Hill told State Affairs the fallout from the court’s decision to suspend his license has been an “unfortunate chapter.” He said it was “a sign of the times when you’re a popular, particularly conservative figure, and knives come out.” Asked whether he would have done anything differently that night, Hill said he “probably would have gone home.”
His vision
On the campaign trail, Hill has advocated for a comprehensive tax plan. His proposals include cutting Indiana’s corporate income taxes and the state gas tax while also eliminating state income taxes for residents who are 18 to 35, according to his campaign website. But he says “wasteful spending” must be addressed before the tax breaks can be realized. (Hill has criticized Lt. Gov. Suzanne Crouch’s proposal to eliminate state income taxes for all residents.)
In addition, Hill’s campaign centers on stopping “the flood of illegal immigrants” and preserving “medical freedom.” At the COVID-19 pandemic’s zenith, Gov. Holcomb implemented a mask mandate in Indiana. Hill pounced on the decision, arguing Holcomb overstepped. “We had a government that failed us in many respects by providing misinformation, wrong information,” Hill said, pointing to guidance on mask usage changing as the pandemic progressed.
Hill maintains the damage done by government lockdowns “far exceeded the damage that was done by the virus itself, and we’re still seeing that a lot of businesses were scuttled. A lot of school kids have some learning and social behaviors that are offset because of the time that was taken away from the education process.”
Leah Wilson, executive director and co-founder of the nonprofit Stand for Health Freedom, said Hill “wasn’t tricked like others were” during the COVID-19 pandemic. “Most of the others you talk to say it was justified to cancel freedom for at least a few weeks,” she said of the other gubernatorial candidates. Because of that, Wilson’s organization endorses Hill. She said he is “not excitable, which allows him to be unwavering.”
Asked during debates about his other policies, Hill has compared the federal government to a “crack dealer” that attaches programmatic “entanglements” to its financial support of schools. If elected as Indiana’s next governor, he wants to do away with the entanglements, cut government regulations to help more child care facilities enter the market, empower locals to make their own economic development decisions, corral the Indiana Economic Development Corp. and end diversity, equity and inclusion practices in state government as well as “radical gender ideology” and “critical race theory” in classrooms.
“Objective truth is under assault on a regular basis,” Hill told State Affairs. “I think the manipulation of the justice system, the weaponization of race, the sexualization of our children call upon us to have a new administration of freedom.”
Asked about his chances of winning after several poor showings in recent polls, Hill said, “The only poll that matters is the poll on May 7.”
State Rep. Ed DeLaney, D-Indianapolis, said Hill had “managed to bring discredit to his office in an unusual and particularly terrible fashion.” In 2019, DeLaney authored a resolution urging the House to conduct an investigation of the allegations against Hill, but it wasn’t taken up.
Hill came into the gubernatorial race as a “hard-right, pro-Trump” candidate, DeLaney said, “but he hasn’t had money to send that message. And when, essentially, almost all of the candidates are sending that message, how does he distinguish himself? So, sadly for him, this distinction is the one that I pointed to: He got himself in this horrible situation.”
Horvath, Hill’s campaign chair, sees his situation differently. She described the allegations against Hill as a “he said, she said” scenario that has only been brought up sparingly on the campaign trail.
In The Atrium lobby, Hill spoke with his team, surrounded by bustling conservatives. Just, the Gladiator owner, walked through one of the facility’s entrances — he was there to support Andrew Ireland in the House District 90 race — and spotted Hill. The pair reminisced about the Jeep show. “He remembered exactly what the Jeep was; he remembered everything about it,” Just told State Affairs of his conversation with Hill.
Hill asked Just to “remember” him during the upcoming primary election, Just told State Affairs. Yet, after their April encounter, Just said he is “still kind of closed” on the candidate he plans to vote for.
“I still haven’t made up my mind yet,” Just said. But he acknowledged Hill “definitely left a mark.”
About Hill
- Age: 63
- Hometown: Elkhart
- Education: Bachelor of Science in marketing and Doctor of Jurisprudence from Indiana University
- Family: Wife, Teresa, and five children
- Job: Attorney, consultant
- Work history: Indiana’s 43rd attorney general (2017-2021), an attorney since 1988, consultant with Maverick Consulting LLC, Elkhart County prosecutor (2003-2017)
Read these related stories
- Eric Doden is running from behind but hopes his ‘bold vision’ will propel him forward
- Suzanne Crouch positions herself as a ‘different’ candidate for the voiceless
- Mike Braun on why he wants to be in politics ‘at a level of significance’
- Who is Jamie Reitenour? Indianapolis mom mobilized volunteers to make governor’s ballot
- Brad Chambers sells himself as ‘business guy’ to lead Indiana
Contact Jarred Meeks on X @jarredsmeeks or email him at [email protected].
X @StateAffairsIN
Facebook @stateaffairsin
Instagram @stateaffairsin
LinkedIn @stateaffairspro
Read this story for free.
Create AccountRead this story for free
By submitting your information, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy.
How this year’s race for lieutenant governor bucks tradition
The usually quiet process of selecting party nominees for lieutenant governor has taken on additional intrigue, as a controversial Republican outsider has challenged the status quo and the Democratic gubernatorial nominee is keeping her options open. For years, parties have typically rubber-stamped their gubernatorial candidate’s choice for lieutenant governor. Republican nominee Mike Braun in May …
Indiana appeals court chief judge on AI, mental health, and the state’s dwindling number of lawyers
Many Hoosiers may be familiar with their local courts or hear about the opinions of the Indiana Supreme Court, but a middle tier in the state’s judiciary system shapes justice through some 2,000 rulings a year.
The 15 judges of the Indiana Court of Appeals dole out opinions on everything from murder and fraud to civil and child welfare cases. Every Hoosier has the right to appeal a conviction or ruling, and the Court of Appeals, the second-highest court in the state, takes up each case sent its way.
Chief Judge Robert R. Altice Jr. has analyzed thousands of cases since being appointed by Gov. Mike Pence in 2015. Prior to that, he spent 15 years as an elected judge in Marion County.
Altice sat down with State Affairs for a discussion on the ins and outs of his court, how changes in technology and mental health care have impacted his work and what he sees as a major problem facing the nation’s judicial system.
This conversation has been edited for clarity, brevity and length.
Q. What sort of cases does the Court of Appeals hear?
A. We hear really everything except death penalty cases. If there’s a death penalty case, it goes straight to the [state] Supreme Court. Otherwise, we get it.
I’ve had to publish an opinion on a traffic court case. About 65% of our cases are criminal. Every, everything under the sun: murders, rapes, robberies, child molestation.
Then there are civil cases. We do medical malpractice suits, traffic accidents, you name it. Complex business litigation? Our court was involved.
Q. How does the appeals process work? There’s not a new trial, right?
A. I’ll give you an example. Let’s say you got a murder case and the defendant gets convicted and gets 65 years, which is the max for a murder conviction. Everybody in the state of Indiana has got an automatic right to appeal. Not everybody takes that right, but most criminal defendants do.
Somebody will write his brief for him. That attorney will find three issues that they think will result in a new trial if we rule in their favor. That’s really what the appellate process is: Are the errors committed at the trial court level significant enough to warrant a new trial?
And then the attorney general in the criminal cases will write a brief in opposition, then the appellant or the defendant can file a reply brief as well.
We sit and read transcripts and their briefs and do our own research and come to a decision as to whether or not there was error at the trial court level that warrants a new trial.
Q. How many of the 2,000 cases your court receives a year, how many are taken up by the Indiana Supreme Court?
A. It is rare. You start with the proposition that trial courts throughout the state are doing about 2+ million cases a year. That’s everything. We do 2,000 opinions a year. I think the Supreme Court writes about 60 opinions a year. That’s what their taking of ours.
But we’re considered an error-correcting court, whereas that’s really not their role. Their role is more jurisprudential. It’s “should we look at changing in this regard or changing precedent.”
It’s really an inverse pyramid, with the trial courts, I always say, doing the heavy lifting.
Our turnaround time is very quick. It’s about three months. Some states require oral arguments in every single case, but we don’t.
If you ask for an oral argument, we will sometimes grant that. We do a lot of oral arguments, but most of our oral arguments are traveling oral arguments. We travel all over the state and do live arguments. And we do those in front of high schools, small colleges, bigger schools.
We answer questions or ask questions like we normally would do, and then once we’re finished, then we have a question and answer session with the students.
Q. One thing we heard about at the State of the Judiciary is there’s an attorney shortage in the state, particularly in rural areas. How has that affected your work?
A. I think we’re seeing more pro se litigants, people representing themselves, and that can be difficult because we hold them to the same standard that we would hold a lawyer to. It can be really difficult for them. So in that regard, it has hurt.
We’ll go to traveling oral arguments in some rural county, and the bar association will host a lunch for us. We’ll go and there’ll be six lawyers in the room and I’ll say to somebody, “So how many people are in the bar?” And they’ll say, “Well, you’re looking at it.”
That access to justice is a really difficult thing that I think the state of Indiana is dealing with now. The Supreme Court has just set up a task force to look into how we can improve that. I believe law schools are looking at incentivizing young kids to go practice in rural areas.
It’s a real issue. I think a lot of it stems from the low bar passage rate of the last 10+ years. It’ll be interesting to see what the task force thinks.
Q. How has technology impacted the court?
A. Technology has been huge. All our work is done online now. The briefs are filed online.
The technology that we have to keep an eye on, and we’re already looking at, is artificial intelligence. What impact is that going to have on the courts, especially our courts?
You can punch a button and write an opinion. It’s probably not going to be very good, but as technology improves, it’s going to be. We’re kind of leery of that.
But at the same time, from a research standpoint, it’s been a very valuable tool. We’ve been using AI in that regard for researching for some time now, with Westlaw and Lexus as they’ve come out with those kinds of tools.
Q. There have been changes in how the world views mental health. How has that impacted the court?
A. I see it primarily in the sentencing arena. Before every defendant is sentenced by a trial court, a pre-sentence investigation is prepared on them. And so that’s where you see a lot of that because it discusses their entire background, and the number of people with mental health issues coming through has really increased greatly.
I think the pandemic had a lot to do with that as well. But again, the mental health issues are very much creeping into the system, and one of the things that we’re constantly working on trying to be aware of and trying to, to the extent we can with alternatives to incarceration, assist people.
Q. Are there any other challenges facing today’s judiciary?
A. I guess not necessarily my court, but courts in general. It appears to me that Congress is broken. They’re not passing laws.
So, what are we doing? We have to rely on the other two branches of government to kind of take up the slack, and that’s why you’re seeing tons of executive orders.
That’s not traditionally their job, and then you’re seeing the courts being called upon to determine whether or not those regulations are enforceable.
I see that as a long-term problem that we’ve got to get corrected.
Contact Rory Appleton on X at @roryehappleton or email him at [email protected].
How McCormick, Braun view abortion, taxes and other key issues
A Democrat-turned-Republican and Republican-turned-Democrat will soon face off in the race to become Indiana’s next governor. Sen. Mike Braun, who voted as a Democrat prior to 2012, captured the Republican nomination in Tuesday’s primary. Jennifer McCormick, formerly a Republican Superintendent of Public Instruction, will represent the Democrats. Voters will decide the state’s next chief executive …
Spartz, Shreve, Stutzman win Republican congressional primaries
A central Indiana congresswoman successfully fought off eight primary challengers, while crowded races for three other Republican-leaning congressional districts began to clear in Tuesday’s primary election. And in northeastern Indiana, a former congressman held on in a tight race as he seeks to return to Congress. All of the state’s nine U.S. House of Representatives …