A BILL FOR AN ACT to amend the Indiana Code concerning public safety.
Summary
House Bill 1015 would limit how the governor may use the Indiana National Guard for state law-enforcement purposes. The bill adds a new section to the Indiana Code providing that, except in specified circumstances, the governor may not order Guard members to perform law-enforcement duties that could lead to the surveillance, apprehension, detention, or arrest of an individual. The bill is aimed at preventing the Guard from being used in a policing role against civilians.
The bill includes two key exceptions. It does not apply to Guard units that have been federalized under federal law, and it does not apply when Guard members are called to state active duty during a governor-declared emergency for a natural disaster, riot, or act of terrorism. It also states that the new restriction may not be suspended under Indiana emergency powers law or any other law, making the limitation mandatory unless one of the listed exceptions applies.
Impact
HB 1015 would amend Indiana public safety law by adding IC 10-16-7-26 and restricting the governor’s authority to deploy the Indiana National Guard for certain law-enforcement functions. In practice, it would bar use of the Guard for policing activities involving surveillance, detention, apprehension, or arrest, while preserving existing authority for federalized service and emergency deployments tied to disasters, riots, or terrorism. The bill would affect the governor, the Indiana National Guard, and state emergency-management powers under IC 10-14-3.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes in the provided materials, the overall sentiment appears precautionary and civil-liberties oriented rather than controversial on the record. The bill’s framing suggests support for limiting military involvement in civilian law enforcement while preserving emergency response capabilities. No formal opposition or support is documented in the provided context.
Contention
The main point of contention is the scope of the governor’s authority to use the National Guard in law-enforcement roles. Supporters would likely view the bill as a safeguard against militarized policing and an important separation between military and civilian law enforcement. Potential critics may argue that the restriction could reduce flexibility in responding to public safety crises, though the bill preserves exceptions for federalization and certain emergencies. No specific stakeholder positions are included in the provided committee or vote history.