��ɫtv

The suit accused the hospital system of violating HIPAA, the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, and a state law, for not protecting patient information in the case of a 10-year-old rape victim who traveled to Indiana to receive abortion drugs.

's attorneys later that she shared no personally identifiable information about the girl, and no such details were reported in the Star's story on July 1, 2022, but it became a days after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade that June.

A federal judge in Indianapolis initially granted IU Health’s motion to dismiss the case in June, prompting Rokita to file an amended complaint in July. His office then sought the case's dismissal last week, writing that the state's initial complaints have been satisfied by actions IU Health has taken since first reported on the girl's case.

These actions include continuing to train employees not to talk about patients in public spaces and informing employees that if they are contacted by a reporter, they must inform the public relations or communications departments before responding, Rokita's dismissal motion said.

“We are pleased the information this office sought over two years ago has finally been provided and the necessary steps have been taken to accurately and consistently train their workforce to protect patients and their health care workers,” Rokita said Monday in a statement.

However, IU Health said it has always had such practices in place, and it's disheartened by the claim that these were corrective actions made in response to Rokita's suit.

“IU Health has and will continue to maintain its robust HIPAA compliance policies and training for its team members, as it has for years,” its statement reads. “While we are pleased the Indiana Attorney General’s office voluntarily moved to dismiss the case, we are disappointed the state’s limited taxpayer resources were put toward this matter after the first complaint was dismissed by the Court on the merits.”

Indiana’s medical licensing board in May 2023, saying she didn’t abide by privacy laws by talking publicly about the girl’s treatment.

It was far short of the medical license suspension Rokita’s office sought, and IU Health’s own internal investigation found that Bernard did not violate privacy laws.

The Indiana Supreme Court, meanwhile, reprimanded Rokita and ordered him to pay $250 in court costs after he admitted making statements about Bernard that violated .