Gabe Whitley’s Federal Lawsuit Challenges Political Bias and Integrity Issues in Indiana’s Disciplinary Commission

Indianapolis, Indiana – In a fiery statement accompanying his recent federal lawsuit, Gabriel “Honest Gabe” Whitley has called out the Indiana Disciplinary Commission for allegedly protecting its allies instead of holding them accountable. Whitley, who recently filed for an injunction, has accused the Commission of shielding those with political connections and of failing to properly investigate grievances lodged against prominent attorney and journalist Abdul Hakim Shabazz.

Whitley’s case rests on a series of grievances he filed against Shabazz, whom he claims has misused his law license to target him unjustly. According to Whitley, the legal actions brought against him by Shabazz stem from a vendetta following a failed defamation lawsuit in 2022, in which Whitley prevailed. “This isn’t about disbarring any lawyer; it’s about protecting the integrity of the legal profession and holding accountable those who misuse their connections with the disciplinary commission,” Whitley stated.

Whitley claims that Shabazz, who has allegedly become fixated on him, has launched multiple lawsuits in retaliation, leading Whitley to file five formal grievances. However, Whitley asserts that the Commission has refused to pursue these grievances due to Shabazz’s political connections, casting doubt on its impartiality. Whitley’s lawsuit calls for federal intervention to ensure the Disciplinary Commission upholds its duty to investigate complaints fairly and without favoritism.

In his statement, Whitley underscored the broader significance of the issue, declaring, “When the commission shields friends and acts with political bias, it undermines trust and credibility. This issue is bigger than any one individual—it’s about preserving the impartiality and principles that define the legal profession.”

Beyond his grievances with Shabazz, Whitley’s lawsuit underscores a more significant issue within Indiana’s legal oversight system. He contends that the Commission’s history reveals a politically driven agenda, as demonstrated by its actions against conservative figures such as current Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita and former Indiana Attorney General Curtis Hill. According to Whitley, this behavior has transformed the Commission into a political weapon, diverging from its intended role of safeguarding the profession’s integrity.

“This Commission was never meant to be a tool of political retribution,” Whitley added. “It was intended to hold lawyers accountable and ensure fairness within Indiana’s legal system.”

In response, Whitley is calling on the federal courts to mandate an unbiased investigation into his grievances against Shabazz and to restore the Commission’s original purpose of maintaining integrity in Indiana’s legal community.