When news broke that Indiana Gov. Eric Holcomb’s office paid the law firm Lewis & Wagner nearly $520,000 to represent him in his suit against the Indiana General Assembly, Rokita issued a statement.

The attorney said the legal fees were “a waste of Hoosier taxpayers’ hard-earned money.”

Rokita is right about that.

But, again, not in the way he thinks.

Part of the reason Holcomb’s legal bills were so high is that Rokita helped run up the tab. To court know-nothing voters, the attorney general inserted himself into a dispute between two branches of state government and created an expensive diversion for both the governor and the courts.

Let’s recap.

The tiff between the state’s more conservative lawmakers and the governor started because the lawmakers were angry with Holcomb over the fact that the coronavirus crisis was, well, a crisis. They wanted to curb the governor’s power to exercise his emergency powers.

So, they passed a law that gave the legislature the authority to call itself into session.

They did so even though the Indiana Constitution clearly grants that power to the governor. But the conservative lawmakers—who like to call themselves “strict constructionists”—decided if they closed one eye while they read and covered the other while they read that august document it could be made to say exactly what they wanted it to say.

That’s when Rokita stepped onto the stage.

He sided with the legislators, arguing that reading the constitution blindfolded made their arguments foolproof. In addition, he tried to deny Holcomb the right to hire counsel by contending that he, the attorney general, could serve as counsel for both the plaintiff and defendant as well as judge, jury and appellate court.

The courts quickly said that Rokita’s argument was—well, I’m trying to think of another word besides “absurd,” but none comes to mind.

But it proved to be an expensive bit of comic relief because the meter was running while the governor’s lawyers knocked down Rokita’s pandering and nonsensical contention.

It also delayed reckoning on the constitutional issue in question.

When the governor’s suit did reach the high court, the state’s Supreme Court justices ruled unanimously in Holcomb’s favor.

It turns out that one does have to read the Indiana Constitution with his or her eyes open.

And skipping over the words one doesn’t like doesn’t help, either.

All this means that Todd Rokita backed a bad cause and, in his campaign to woo Trump voters, added needless expense to what was already a senseless fight.

That said, he does have a point.

The other part of the reason Holcomb’s suit was so expensive is that it took some time to get it before the Indiana Supreme Court. That doesn’t make sense.

The second the governor and the legislature quarreled over a constitutional principle, every sentient being with more than three functioning brain cells realized the dispute was going to end up before the state’s high court.

This was, after all, a disagreement over a constitutional principle—which branch, the executive or the legislative, had a specific power.

In such cases, there should be a way to get the matter before the Supreme Court in a more expeditious manner.

This is particularly true when there are lives at stake, as there were in this case.

What the lawmakers were trying to do was prevent the governor from implementing emergency measures should another wave of the coronavirus pandemic hit. They wanted to be able to call themselves into session so they could tie Holcomb’s hands if he asked Hoosiers to wear masks again.

In such circumstances, an expedited process to bring the debate before the justices just makes sense.

It also would save money, as Todd Rokita, perhaps inadvertently, pointed out.

So would having the state’s attorney general demonstrate a modicum of personal and professional restraint.

Figuring out a way to expedite review of genuine constitutional controversies is an achievable reform.

Getting Todd Rokita to act like a grown-up?

Well, that’s a much tougher nut to crack.