Judge finds Indiana’s Republican attorney general repeatedly violated state law in high-profile abortion case
Indiana AG Todd Rokita unlawfully breached confidentially laws by discussing his investigation into the provider who cared for a 10-year-old rape survivor
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.A state judge in Indiana found that Republican Attorney General Todd Rokita repeatedly violated state law by publicly discussing details of his investigation into an obstetrician-gynecologist targeted by GOP officials and right-wing media after she provided abortion care to a 10-year-old rape survivor.
Judge Heather Welch found that Mr Rokita caused “irreparable harm” to Dr Caitlin Bernard’s reputation with his “unlawful breaches” of confidentiality provisions after he discussed his investigation on national news and in the press.
But the ruling on 2 December denied Dr Bernard’s request for a preliminary injunction into the investigation because Mr Rokita had filed an administrative action with the state’s medical licensing board this week, a move intended to punish Dr Bernard.
The move effectively changed venues for Dr Bernard’s complaint.
“Due to the recent referral of the investigations to the Medial Licensing Board by the Attorney General, however, the Court no longer has jurisdiction to make any factual findings over these ultimate questions, even for the purposes of a preliminary order,” according to the filing.
Dr Bernard’s lawsuit alleged Mr Rokita relied on spurious and frivolous consumer complaints as the basis for his subpoenas for medical records of abortion patients.
He is accused of making false and misleading statements about Dr Bernard and the case of a 10-year-old girl from Ohio. The girl’s alleged attacker has been arrested and reportedly confessed to raping her.
On 30 November, Mr Rokita announced that his office filed an administrative action against Dr Bernard before the state licensing board, claiming that she “violated federal and Indiana law related to patient privacy and the reporting of child abuse,” echoing baseless accusations that she failed to notify law enforcement about her patient’s case.
His office accused the doctor of violating state medical reporting laws. These accusations came despite documents and testimony from Dr Bernard -- and others -- showing that the girl’s case had already been reported to Ohio authorities before she received care in Indiana. Dr Bernard and another physician, Dr Amy Caldwell, as well as their patients, have filed the suit to block his office from allegedly infringing patient-doctor confidentiality.
After the US Supreme Court overturned Roe v Wade on 24 June, officials in Ohio enacted an anti-abortion law prohibiting abortion at the detection of a so-called “heartbeat” at roughly six weeks of pregnancy. This law forced the victim to seek legal care in neighbouring Indiana.
In an emailed statement on Friday, Dr Bernard’s attorney Kathleen DeLaney said the ruling confirms that there was “no basis” for the investigation into the case and Dr Bernard’s partner Dr Amy Caldwell.
“Last week, my client and other witnesses gave critical and favorable testimony, after which Mr Rokita suddenly moved the case to a new forum, taking it out of the hands of Judge Welch,” she said. “We are confident in the record and testimony that we have already developed and look forward to presenting Dr Bernard’s evidence to the Medical Licensing Board.”