News Archive

A federal judge dismissed a lawsuit brought against Indiana Attorney General Curtis Hill and the state of Indiana. The suit was brought by four women who accused him of inappropriately touching them at a party in 2018. The accusers could pursue their claims in state court, but that would force them to endure another lengthy legal process, said Professor Jennifer Drobac. She discussed the ruling’s ramifications for a story that appeared in the Indianapolis Star. 

The ruling dismissed all federal claims in the civil case, pointing out that they did not meet the legal standard to show that Hill violated federal law or the U.S. Constitution. The ruling leaves the door open for future legal action on the part of the plaintiffs against Hill. They brought suit in June 2019, alleging sexual harassment and retaliation under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and discrimination under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14^th Amendment. The suit claims Hill sought to intimidate them, and pointed out the way they were treated by lawmakers after their accusations against the attorney general were made public.

The accusers could bring a state lawsuit that would deal with personal injury claims, not discrimination, which could diminish the potential for compensatory damages, Professor Drobac said.

"This is why women give up," Professor Drobac said in the story. "It's exhausting. People want to move on with their lives."

Professor Drobac is at work on her next book, The Myth of Consent, which she is co-writing with Professor Oliver Goodenough. That work will explore the neuroscience of adult decision making and how the science should influence law reform. She is a Samuel R. Rosen Professor of Law.