Indiana Supreme Court Justice Loretta Rush Named in Lawsuit Filed by Former Congressional Candidate

Indianapolis, IN — October 28, 2024

In a bold move challenging Indiana’s legal oversight bodies, former congressional candidate Gabriel Whitley has filed an injunction against the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission, with allegations implicating Indiana Supreme Court Justice Loretta Rush. Whitley, a vocal figure in Indiana’s political scene, claims that the Commission, under Rush's oversight, has shielded certain individuals within the state’s legal and political spheres from investigation, notably failing to hold a close associate of Justice Rush accountable.

The lawsuit, filed today in federal court, calls upon the judiciary to mandate the Disciplinary Commission to investigate alleged abuses of legal privileges by Justice Rush’s associate. Whitley contends that the Commission's inaction, despite several formal complaints, reflects a systematic pattern of favoritism toward well-connected attorneys while disregarding accountability for misconduct.

In his statement, Whitley alleged, “The Commission’s supposed mission to hold lawyers accountable rings hollow when it prioritizes protecting friends and allies over serving justice. They are not a tool of transparency but one of selective persecution—especially targeting political figures like Attorney General Todd Rokita, while ignoring genuine grievances.”

According to Whitley, his experiences with the Commission highlight this perceived inequity. He asserts that over two years, he has faced harassment from an individual close to Justice Rush, a claim he says is substantiated by “clear evidence.” Despite submitting multiple complaints to the Disciplinary Commission, Whitley maintains that no meaningful action has been taken, leading him to file this federal injunction to prompt a thorough investigation.

Whitley’s legal filing brings attention to what he views as an improper use of Indiana’s disciplinary system to silence or undermine political dissenters while giving preferential treatment to individuals within an elite circle of legal professionals. His lawsuit also indirectly calls into question the impartiality of Justice Rush and the broader function of the Indiana Supreme Court in managing oversight responsibilities within the state’s legal profession.

This lawsuit could have broad implications, potentially spurring calls for a review of the Commission’s procedures and the accountability measures for Indiana’s top legal officials. For now, the federal court’s response will be the next indicator of how these claims will proceed—and whether Indiana’s legal and judicial systems will face a new level of scrutiny.