Revisiting a Questionable Ethics Case v. Former Hoosier Lawyer Doug Bernacchi

 Indiana Supreme Court Justices

On April 12, 2025, The Hoosier Enquirer announced plans to reexamine the troubling case of Doug Bernacchi, a Northern Indiana attorney whose 2017 Indiana Supreme Court ethics case raises serious questions about fairness in the state’s legal system. Bernacchi, a respected lawyer with 27 years of unblemished practice and glowing client reviews, faced a disciplinary action that led to his suspension. At age 58, after decades of success, could a seasoned professional like Bernacchi abruptly veer off course—or was his 2015–17 campaign for a South Bend judgeship, during the height of cancel culture, the real trigger for a flimsy ethics case against him?

The Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission, tasked with overseeing attorney conduct, has faced scrutiny for inconsistent enforcement, particularly under two former directors. (The current director will be addressed in future HE stories.) Critics argue it functions less as an ethical watchdog and more as a selective gatekeeper, shielding some attorneys while targeting others. High-profile cases—like those involving lawyers who misappropriated client funds—often see criminal prosecution long before the Commission acts, if it does at all. Are Indiana’s courts or even the marketplace better at regulating attorneys than a body seemingly torn between protecting allies and punishing outsiders?

The Commission’s approach, critics contend, fosters fear over fairness, stifling free speech and discouraging legal reform among Indiana’s independent attorneys. Selective, high-profile disciplinary actions—often resembling show trials—enforce compliance without clear, consistent standards.

Bernacchi himself reportedly said, “No one should go to law school if the system destroys some lawyers’ lives while ignoring valid complaints against others based on connections or alma maters.” He also criticized law schools for failing to prepare graduates for the profession’s real-world demands. His case is striking: in 2015–16, while running for St. Joseph County Circuit Court Judge, a single client complaint sparked an ethics investigation that derailed his career. Despite suspending his campaign amid defamatory media coverage, Bernacchi earned over 47,000 votes, losing to former State Senator John Broden. Notably, Broden, who served as a public defender while a senator, may have violated Article 2, Section 9 of Indiana’s Constitution, which prohibits holding two lucrative state positions simultaneously. Yet Broden faced no repercussions, unlike Bernacchi.

This disparity fuels speculation that Bernacchi was targeted—possibly through “lawfare”—for challenging the status quo. Further scrutiny reveals potential conflicts of interest. Many Indiana Supreme Court justices and legal figures, including Chief Justice Loretta Rush and Judge Broden, share ties to Indiana University’s law schools. All five current justices—Rush, Mark S. Massa, Geoffrey G. Slaughter, Christopher M. Goff, and Derek R. Molter—graduated from either IU’s Maurer School of Law (Bloomington) or Robert H. McKinney School of Law (Indianapolis). Bernacchi, with degrees from Georgetown, Notre Dame, and Loyola University of Chicago, stands outside this network. Could this have influenced his case? HE will ask him and report. Notably, Indiana’s law schools, except Notre Dame, rank poorly in US News and World Report.

Similar concerns echo in other cases. Former Marion County Prosecutor Carl Brizzi, a Valparaiso University Law School graduate, faced ethics charges in 2016–17 but was cleared—though the ordeal tarnished his reputation. He died in 2022 at age 53. Current Attorney General Todd Rokita, disciplined in 2024, admitted violations under pressure, underscoring the Commission’s power to shape careers and reputations. These patterns raise questions: Does Indiana’s disciplinary system punish dissent or protect entrenched interests?

Why practice law in Indiana under such a system? Are law students warned of career pitfalls if they fall out of favor with justices or the state bar? Can judges rule independently without risking their positions? If accused of ethics violations, can attorneys afford independent counsel unconnected to the Commission that oversees their licenses? The system appears one-sided, lacking the checks and balances expected of governmental oversight.

Can attorneys seek public office or exercise free speech without fear of retribution? Perhaps we’ll ask former Attorney General Curtis Hill or current AG Todd Rokita.

The Hoosier Enquirer pledges to dig deeper into Bernacchi’s story, exploring whether it reflects broader issues of fairness, accountability, and reform in Indiana’s top-down legal system.