INDIANAPOLIS — The Indiana Supreme Court issued a public reprimand for Attorney General Todd Rokita.
The court found statements Rokita made about Dr. Caitlin Bernard on a Fox News show publicly violated professional conduct rules.
Rokita referred to Bernard as an "abortion activist acting as a doctor—with a history of failure to report" while there was an investigation pending. Rokita also made statements about Bernard between July 2022 and September 2022 prior to a referral to the Medical Licensing Board.
The court found Rokita's statements "had no substantial purpose other than to embarrass or burden the physician." The court then issued a public reprimand of Rokita.
Rokita will also have to pay $250 for the cost of the proceedings leading to the reprimand.
Two of the justices rejected the agreement, believing the discipline for Rokita was too lenient based on him being an attorney general and admitting to the conduct.
Previously, the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission filed charges against Rokita for violating professional conduct rules.
Rokita shared the following statement on the the Indiana Supreme Court's decision:
"First things first: I deny and was not found to have violated anyone’s confidentiality or any laws. I was not fined. And I will continue as Indiana’s duly-elected attorney general.
Despite the failed attempt to derail our work —which could have disenfranchised nearly 2 million voters, the largest amount in Indiana history for any state office candidate — it all boiled down to a truthful 16-word answer I gave over a year ago during an international media storm caused by an abortionist who put her interests above her patient’s. I received a ‘public reprimand’ for saying that “…we have this abortion activist acting as a doctor— with a history of failing to report.”
The media, medical establishment and cancel culture, all on cue, supported—and then attempted to vindicate—the abortionist who intentionally exposed personal health information at a political rally all in furtherance of their shared ideological and business interests.
These liberal activists would like to cancel your vote because they hate the fact I stand up for liberty. In the healthcare space alone, I stopped the vaccine mandate, publicly contested severely flawed Covid data, significantly curtailed Indiana’s abortion business and fined hospitals and healthcare providers for not putting patients’ privacy first.
Having evidence and explanation for everything I said, I could have fought over those 16 words, but ending their campaign now will save a lot of taxpayer money and distraction, which is also very important to me. In order to resolve this, I was required to sign an affidavit without any modifications.
Now, I will focus even more resources on successfully defending Indiana’s laws, including our pro-life laws, and fighting the mob that silences parents, employees, conservative students, law enforcement, Believers of all faiths, American patriots and free enterprise itself.
As I said at the time, my words are factual. The IU Health physician who caused the international media spectacle at the expense of her patient’s privacy is by her own actions an outspoken abortion activist.
Many know that she openly discussed with a reporter, and caused to be identified, a 10-year-old rape victim at a political rally. She also used this opportunity to wedge herself into various media outlets, including MSNBC and CBS News. In the end, she had the attention of the entire country, including the pro-abortion President and Vice President.
Less well- known is that for years she has appeared as the keynote speaker at pro-abortion rallies and has roamed the hallways of the legislature in a white lab coat attempting to influence lawmakers. Then, in 2019, the doctor unsuccessfully brought litigation against the people of Indiana to legalize a brutal abortion procedure where the living child is extracted piece by piece. She also poses and is interviewed regularly in media outlets and her full-time patient practice focuses exclusively on performing abortions.
Bernard also claims a tattoo —an image of a coat hanger— that she displays and openly discusses with the national media. Whether you think this behavior is good or bad, I challenge any objective Hoosier to conclude that she isn’t an “abortion activist," as I stated.
Also, according to media accounts and complainant press releases, it was in fact publicly alleged well before my tv interview that the abortionist had failed to properly report her work to the state’s department of health.
Privacy must exist between doctor and patient in order for trust to exist so that healthcare can advance. So, we work hard to protect personal health information—like a little girl’s identity and medical trauma—from publication by their caregivers. This is why Bernard’s own peers fined her the maximum allowed by law.
By the way, the Office of Attorney General has nearly two dozen patient privacy cases pending at any time, debunking any claims of a vendetta against Bernard.
Had the cancel culture establishment been successful disenfranchising us, they also would have stifled other elected officials from keeping voters, citizens, and taxpayers informed—especially when uncomfortable facts fall outside a preferred narrative.
I thank Hoosiers for their continued support as we fight for our values."
Rokita's lawsuit against IU Health and comments about Bernard came after she spoke about a 10-year-old, from Ohio, who came to Indiana for an abortion. In July, a 28-year-old man was sentenced to life in prison for the child's rape.
“Neither the 10-year-old nor her mother gave the doctor authorization to speak to the media about their case,” the lawsuit against IU Health says. “Rather than protecting the patient, the hospital chose to protect the doctor, and itself.”
The lawsuit named IU Health and IU Healthcare Associates. It alleged the hospital system violated HIPPA, the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, and a state law for not protecting the patient’s information.
Indiana’s medical licensing board reprimanded Bernard in May, saying she did not abide by privacy laws by talking publicly about the girl’s treatment. It was far short of the medical license suspension that Rokita’s office sought.
Still, the board's decision received widespread criticism from medical groups and others who called it a move to intimidate doctors.
Hospital system officials have argued that Bernard didn’t violate privacy laws.
“We continue to be disappointed the Indiana Attorney General’s office persists in putting the state’s limited resources toward this matter,” IU Health said in a statement at the time.