Indiana Cuts Professional Licensing Times in Half — So What About the Lawyers?

IS INDIANA CHIEF JUSTICE RUSH IN THE CROSS HAIRS OF GOVERNOR'S INITIATIVE TO FIX PROFESSIONAL LICENSING?

INDIANAPOLIS — Indiana Governor Mike Braun has some impressive numbers to show Hoosiers when it comes to SOME professional licensing.

Yes only some. That is the glaring omission in the announcement. The important distinction is that Indiana lawyers "are professionals and are licensed," but their licensing and discipline are controlled by the Indiana Supreme Court rather than Gov. Braun's Indiana Professional Licensing Agency. So Braun's "11.8-to-5.9-day statistic" does not appear to include attorneys.

In the fake news, "Indiana is celebrating the removal of licensing barriers at the same time its own Supreme Court says the state has a lawyer shortage crisis.

In her 2026 State of the Judiciary, Chief Justice Loretta Rush said Indiana ranks "43rd nationally in lawyers per capita" noted that some counties have as few as five attorneys, and described the shortage as a "deepening crisis." HE found Indiana to be 48th, and heading into a complete legal desert for consumers and people needing legal help.

That makes the comparison worth investigating rather than simply saying lawyers were forgotten. If Indiana can measure, publish and slash processing times for doctors, nurses, CPAs, optometrists and funeral directors, why shouldn't the judiciary publish equally clear performance metrics for lawyer admission and attorney discipline?

The administration announced Monday that average processing time across professional license types handled by the state fell from approximately "11.8 days in January 2025 to 5.9 days in July 2026" — essentially cutting the wait in half.

For some professions, the improvements are remarkable. According to figures released by the governor's office, physician licensing dropped from 7.47 days to just 0.84 days. Optometrists went from 22.67 days to one day. Certified public accountants went from 15.24 days to 3.22 days, while funeral directors saw an extraordinary decline from 50.82 days to 2.5 days.

"Quicker time to licensure means a more direct line into a new job and a bigger paycheck for Hoosiers," Braun said in announcing the results. "We are cutting red tape and breaking down barriers to great jobs without sacrificing safety, training, or skill requirements."

That is exactly what government reform is supposed to look like: establish a measurable problem, streamline the bureaucracy and publish the results.

But the announcement raises an obvious question.

What about lawyers?

Apparently, Indiana's lawyers don't count in these particular "professional licensing" statistics, not because attorneys aren't professionals, but because Indiana maintains an unusual division of governmental responsibility. Nurses, physicians, accountants, optometrists and scores of other occupations are licensed through executive-branch agencies. Attorneys are admitted and regulated under the authority of the "Indiana Supreme Court," through institutions including the Board of Law Examiners and the Office of Judicial and Attorney Regulation.

That means Braun cannot simply order the lawyer-licensing bureaucracy to operate faster.

But somebody should be asking whether the same philosophy ought to apply.

Indiana Already Admits It Has a Lawyer Problem

The omission becomes considerably more interesting because Indiana's judiciary itself acknowledges that the state faces a serious shortage of attorneys.

In her 2026 State of the Judiciary address, Chief Justice Loretta Rush called the attorney shortage a "deepening crisis." Indiana, she reported, ranks 43rd nationally in lawyers per capita, two Indiana law schools have closed during the past decade and some counties are now home to as few as five attorneys.

The judiciary deserves credit for recognizing the problem. The Commission on Indiana's Legal Future has recommended examining alternative licensing pathways and incentives designed to attract lawyers to underserved communities. Indiana has also expanded temporary licensing opportunities for certain attorneys already licensed elsewhere who work as prosecutors, public defenders, Department of Child Services lawyers, legal-aid attorneys or law-school clinical faculty.

Those are meaningful reforms.

But Braun's licensing announcement provides another useful model: measure everything.

How long does an Indiana bar applicant actually wait from submission of a completed application until final admission?

How long does character-and-fitness review take?

How many applications remain pending for 30, 60, 90 or 180 days?

How quickly are reciprocity and transferred Uniform Bar Examination applications processed?

And the uncomfortable question should extend beyond admission to attorney discipline, which is completely a joke in this state under CJ Rush, who needs to retire/resign or be recalled, or impeached before it is too late.

How long does an Indiana disciplinary grievance remain unresolved before a lawyer learns whether it will be dismissed or pursued? What is the median duration of an investigation? How many matters remain open beyond one year? What procedural protections exist against an unfounded complaint becoming punishment through delay itself?

Those numbers matter to the public, but they also matter to lawyers.

Due Process Is Professional Reform Too

Indiana's attorney disciplinary system necessarily has a different mission from an ordinary occupational licensing agency. Lawyers are officers of the courts, handle client money and confidential information, and routinely exercise enormous influence over people's property, liberty and families. Serious misconduct must be investigated seriously.

But protecting the public and protecting due process aren't competing objectives.

Indiana's disciplinary rules provide confidentiality before formal charges are filed, and when formal misconduct is established, the Supreme Court can impose sanctions ranging from reprimand to suspension and permanent disbarment. That authority is enormous—and appropriately so when lawyers abuse the trust placed in them.

Precisely because the authority is enormous, transparency about the performance of the regulatory system itself should be equally important.

The same principle Braun invoked for other professions should apply here: eliminate unnecessary barriers without eliminating legitimate standards.

Indiana shouldn't make it easier for an incompetent lawyer to practice. It should make it easier for a qualified lawyer to practice—and make certain that a lawyer facing an accusation receives a fair, predictable and timely process.

Those aren't radical propositions.

They are basic principles of professional regulation.

Two Branches, Same State

Braun's administration deserves recognition if the licensing improvements announced this week withstand scrutiny over time. Cutting the average turnaround from 11.8 days to 5.9 days is a significant accomplishment, particularly if Indiana has managed to do it without weakening professional standards.

There is one caveat: the administration's announcement did not disclose the total number of applications represented in its comparison, something that would help outsiders evaluate the statistics more completely.

Still, the numbers establish a benchmark.

Now Indiana's judiciary should consider doing something similar.

Publish easily understandable annual statistics showing how quickly lawyers are admitted. Publish meaningful statistics showing how long disciplinary investigations take. Establish benchmarks. Identify bottlenecks. Compare Indiana with neighboring states. Determine whether reciprocity rules unnecessarily discourage experienced attorneys from relocating here.

Then set targets and report the results.

Because Indiana cannot simultaneously say "we desperately need more lawyers" and refuse to examine every governmental barrier affecting the lawyers it already has and the attorneys who might otherwise come here.

The governor cannot order the Supreme Court to reform attorney licensing, nor should he. Separation of powers matters.

But separation of powers shouldn't become separation from accountability.

Braun has effectively challenged Indiana government to demonstrate that professional regulation can be faster without becoming weaker.

Indiana's lawyers are professionals too.

Maybe it's time the state's judicial branch showed Hoosiers the numbers—and demonstrated that reform doesn't stop at the courthouse door.

The factual foundation here is particularly strong because the 5.9-day figure comes directly from Braun's office, while the lawyer-shortage argument comes directly from the Indiana Supreme Court itself AND LORETTA RUSH IN PARTICULAR.