Gov. Mike Braun’s decision to give two of his top officials additional leadership posts has revived a longstanding constitutional question in Indiana: when can one person legally hold two government offices at once?
Last month, Indiana Secretary of Education Katie Jenner was confirmed as the state’s next higher education commissioner, while also keeping her K-12 role.
Just weeks later, following the abrupt resignation of Jennifer-Ruth Green, Indiana State Police Superintendent Anthony Scott was tapped by Braun to take on a second job serving as the secretary of public safety.
Green stepped down amid an ongoing ethics investigation by the state inspector general into alleged ghost employment and misuse of state property. It’s now up to the State Ethics Commission to decide whether she violated state law — and what sanctions, if any, to impose.
Jenner’s salary will remain the same $275,000, according to the state’s online transparency portal. Scott’s compensation is expected to rise from $184,842 to about $275,000 — the same pay as other cabinet secretaries — Braun’s office confirmed.
Administration officials say the appointments reflect Braun’s broader push to make state government leaner and more effective.
“Gov. Braun campaigned on streamlining government and making it work better for Hoosiers,” said Griffin Reid, a spokesperson for the governor’s office. “Combining these roles is a common sense move that will save taxpayer dollars and improve service.”
What Indiana’s Constitution says
Indiana governors have occasionally consolidated power by stacking responsibilities on top officials — a practice sometimes referred to as “dual hatting.”
Braun’s predecessor, Gov. Eric Holcomb, named then-Public Safety Secretary Rob Carter to also lead the Department of Correction in 2017.
And under former Gov. Mitch Daniels, some cabinet secretaries simultaneously headed state agencies such as the Department of Workforce Development and the Office of Management and Budget.
The Indiana Constitution prohibits most public officials from holding more than one “lucrative office” — meaning a public post created by law that carries a salary or other fixed compensation — at the same time.
Article 2, Section 9 states that “no person may hold more than one lucrative office at the same time, except as expressly permitted in this Constitution.”
But that provision — in place since Indiana’s 1851 Constitution — leaves gray areas.
Not every government job qualifies as a “lucrative office.”
Some positions are created in statute with sovereign powers and a set salary, making them clearly covered. Others are more administrative, created by the governor without legislative definition, making them less likely to trigger the constitutional ban.
A “Dual Office Holding Guide” published by Attorney General Todd Rokita’s office lays out a four-step analysis to evaluate whether someone can legally hold two public positions at once.
- Are both positions “lucrative offices” under Article 2, Section 9? If yes, the dual role is unconstitutional and must end. If not, move to step two.
- Would holding both violate separation of powers? Indiana’s Constitution bars one person from exercising powers of different government branches simultaneously.
- Are the positions incompatible or do they create a conflict of interest? Dual service is improper if one job is subordinate to the other or the responsibilities clash.
- Is the combination prohibited by other law? State or federal statutes — including the federal Hatch Act — can separately bar some officeholders from taking another role.The guide cautions, however, that even if a dual role passes all four tests, it still may pose “public policy concern[s]” or risks of conflict that should be carefully considered.
Although the education secretary and the higher education commissioner are paid positions, which would normally raise red flags under step one, Jenner is continuing with one salary rather than drawing two paychecks. As such, the governor’s office held that the arrangement does not amount to holding two lucrative offices.
Steps two and three also pose little conflict for Jenner, given that both of her roles fall squarely within the executive branch and share the same policy goal of overseeing Indiana’s education system. Additionally, no other state or federal law blocks the overlap, clearing step four.
For Scott, the position of ISP superintendent is created by statute and is clearly lucrative, while the secretary of public safety is a cabinet designation crafted by the governor. That makes it more akin to an advisory role than a separate office.
Like Jenner’s case, Scott’s appointment passes the separation of powers test, and the governor’s team contends there is no inherent conflict since both positions share the same public safety mission. Scott, too, will be paid one salary, not two.
The governor’s rationale
Braun’s office has maintained that Jenner and Scott’s new assignments comply with this framework. Administration officials confirmed both appointments were reviewed under the four-step analysis.
Jenner, who now oversees both K-12 and higher education policy, additionally defended the combination as an opportunity for alignment across sectors.
“Presently, in Indiana, about 60% of our budget is devoted to education,” she said shortly after her commissioner role was confirmed last month. “The opportunity we have in Indiana is to ensure we’re getting the best return on investment for those dollars,” she told reporters. “What is really working? What is moving the needle? Let’s invest more in that.”
Dan Peterson, chair of the Indiana Commission for Higher Education board, praised the move, too.
“When you’re a great leader, you get more and more responsibility,” he told reporters. “This move, which helps bring the education vertical as close together as possible, makes a ton of sense.”
Scott, in a Sept. 9 message to state police staff, called his appointment “an opportunity [that] goes far beyond me as an individual and would not have been possible without ISP’s well-established commitment to professionalism, excellence of service and public trust.” He emphasized that greater collaboration across Indiana’s “public safety vertical” would benefit from the standards of the state police.
Still, Scott asked for patience as he learns to balance both jobs:
“As your Superintendent, my commitment to you and to the Department will never waiver,” he wrote. “I do ask for your patience as I continue to navigate the responsibilities of this new position.”
Indiana Capital Chronicle is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Indiana Capital Chronicle maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Niki Kelly for questions: info@indianacapitalchronicle.com.
