Judicial Resources Committee: Commitment to the Future of Indiana’s Courts

By Adam Clay, Staff Attorney | Office of Communication, Education & Outreach

Indiana’s superior courts are created by statute. During the 2025 legislative session, the general assembly considered a proposal to eliminate sixteen courts across the state. Ultimately, nine judicial officer positions were abolished, and seven judicial officer positions were created in locations that the legislature deemed appropriate. The Judicial Conference of Indiana believes it is imperative that our lawmakers have input from the judiciary—including weighted caseload data and recommendations for adding and removing courts—so they can have the best information available when making these decisions.

So, in the summer of 2025, the Judicial Conference Board of Directors created a Judicial Resources Committee (JRC) to provide that input. The JRC is designed to be a small group, consisting of judges and legislative partners who are well-informed about the allocation of judicial officers across the state and the comprehensive needs of each county-based justice system. The committee is dedicated to improving the allocation and use of judicial resources across the state while maintaining a fair, accessible, and effective judicial system.

“The Judicial Resources Committee is about bringing greater transparency, accountability, and strategic planning to how we evaluate our court system. As our state grows and needs evolve, we have a responsibility to make sure judicial resources are being allocated wisely, efficiently, and in a way that best serves Hoosiers while respecting taxpayer dollars. I’m pleased to be part of that process.”

State Senator Cyndi Carrasco

Judicial Resources Committee

The committee is chaired by Justice Christopher Goff and consists of judges representing courts from across Indiana, at the high and low end of utilization, along with the chairs of the committees for Strategic Planning and Judicial Administration, and the president of the Indiana Judges Association. The chair of the Interim Study Committee on Courts and the Judiciary (Interim Study Committee), currently Representative Chris Jeter, completes the committee’s official membership. Senator Cyndi Carrasco, vice-chair of the Interim Study Committee, regularly attends JRC meetings and provides valuable input from the perspective of the legislative branch.

JRC Committee Members

Interim Study Committee

Under Indiana Code § 2-5-1.3-13, the Indiana General Assembly formed the Interim Study Committee tasked with:

• Reviewing and making recommendations concerning all requests for new courts and judicial officers or changes to the jurisdiction of existing courts
• Identifying any county where the number of courts or judicial officers exceeds that which is used by the county and recommending whether the number of courts in that county should be decreased

The Interim Study Committee is comprised of state senators and representatives appointed by their respective parties, along with lay members currently including Chief Justice Loretta Rush and Grant County Circuit Court Judge Mark Spitzer.

On October 3, 2024, the Interim Study Committee submitted its bi-annual report to the legislature, recommending that the General Assembly maintain a number of judicial officers statewide that meets—but doesn’t exceed—the state’s actual need based on metrics, even if it means reallocating judges from lower utilized counties to those in need.

The Judicial Conference remains cognizant that Indiana’s changing populations within its 92 counties will require occasional reallocation of judicial resources, creation of new judicial officers, and abolition of courts or judicial officers. In executing its duty, the JRC is mandated to prioritize utilization of existing judicial officers over discharging their service in favor of untrained new judicial officers. Indiana’s sitting judges are uniquely educated and trained at the expense of Hoosier taxpayers and maximizing their services provides substantial cost savings to Indiana.

Weighted Caseload

The weighted caseload framework was established in 1996 to provide a uniform statewide method for comparing trial court caseloads. The system provides an objective method of determining the adequate resources necessary to effectively manage caseloads around the state. A 1.0 weighted caseload ratio means a county has exactly the number of judicial officers it needs.

The weighted caseload model measures the number and types of cases filed and estimates the judicial time required to process those cases. However, it does not measure the availability of supporting resources that may significantly impact a judge’s ability to perform that work. Two courts with identical weighted caseloads may operate under dramatically different circumstances depending on the availability of court administrators, law clerks, probation officers, specialized dockets, treatment programs, courtroom technology, and support staff. Consequently, weighted caseload data should be viewed as an important indicator of workload rather than a complete measure of judicial capacity or community need.

The legislature has stated its intent to maintain a 1.0 statewide ratio of judicial officers to caseload need, and thus the JRC is directed to collect, coordinate, and disseminate information concerning the allocation and utilization of judicial resources to the judicial, legislative, and executive branches.

This includes creating and sharing a bi-annual report to the Interim Study Committee aimed at promoting an ideal utilization of existing judicial resources in Indiana and reporting upon the impact of creating or abolishing judicial officer positions. The Judicial Conference has directed that the JRC’s report shall, whenever feasible, recommend meeting any need for additional judicial officers with existing underutilized judicial officers.

“Every court in Indiana is important to its community and is a part of a larger collaboration to ensure that justice is available to everyone. The JRC is focused on ensuring that each county has the judiciary that its unique circumstances demand.”

Judge Matthew Sarber

Changing Demographics

Indiana’s judicial branch is non-unified and has no common budget or administrative structure. However, the needs of Indiana’s varied counties have changed over the past decade. A recent report from the Kelley School of Business at Indiana University found that “from 2010 to 2020, Indiana’s 23 rural counties—or counties that are not designated as being part of either a metropolitan or micropolitan statistical area by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget—declined by an average of 1,068 residents per year as a group.” Conversely, in the past five years, migration to larger counties has continued to increase.

Making an Impact

The committee has established five workgroups, tasked with:

• crafting communications to the twenty most overutilized courts and the twenty most underutilized courts;
• creating best practices for judicial resource sharing;
• creating a process for requesting new judicial officers and/or courts;
• reviewing opportunities for consolidation and/or regionalization; and
• reviewing rules and legislation to improve the efficiency of sharing judicial resources.

Through these workgroups, the JRC is developing new standards for requests for new courts, best practices for courts offering or utilizing judges from outside their county, and proposing changes to eliminate obstacles for courts sharing resources.

Conclusion

The committee must submit to the Board of Directors its Judicial Resources Utilization Report prior to August 1, 2026. An approved report will then be filed with the Interim Study Committee and distributed to the Indiana Judges Association and the Justice Reinvestment Advisory Council.

“As Indiana’s population shifts, our judiciary must adapt to allow counties to consolidate resources to provide efficient and effective access to Indiana’s courts, regardless of size.”

Justice Christopher Goff

Contact the JRC: [email protected]

Legal Disclaimer:

EIN Presswire provides this news content "as is" without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the author above.