By Marilyn Odendahl
The Indiana Citizen
September 26, 2025
The lawsuit recently filed by Exodus Refugee Immigration Inc. appears to be the first to challenge the civil investigative demands that Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita has been using to access internal documents and communications of law enforcement agencies, nonprofits, businesses and universities across the state.
Exodus, a nonprofit that provides services and support to refugees and other displaced immigrants resettling in Indiana, filed a complaint against Rokita in U.S. District Court for Southern Indiana just over 10 days after receiving a civil investigative demand from the attorney general’s office. The complaint asserts the CID violates the First Amendment’s protection of expression and association, because the investigative demand is directed toward Exodus’s advocacy for and association with immigrant and refugee clients.
“The CID is part of a continuing pattern by the Attorney General of sending unreasonable and unlawful requests to immigrant service organizations and other entities across Indiana,” the Exodus complaint said. “These appear to be designed to advance a personal political agenda and to punish and deter organizations that assist, advocate for, and associate with immigrants and refugees. The investigation is without cause and is in bad faith.”
The case is Exodus Refugee Immigration, Inc. v. Todd Rokita in his official capacity as Attorney General of the State of Indiana, 1:25-cv-1885. Exodus is being represented by the ACLU of Indiana.
In the lawsuit, the nonprofit is asking the federal court to issue an injunction enjoining the attorney general from enforcing the CID. Also, the nonprofit is requesting a monetary award to cover costs and attorneys’ fees associated with the lawsuit.
Cole Varga, CEO of Exodus, said in a press release that his organization was compelled to seek the injunction in order to prevent the attorney general from “wasting valuable time and taxpayer resources on this unfounded demand.”
“This is a clear attempt to intimidate Exodus and to prevent us from serving refugees and other humanitarian immigrants here in Central Indiana,” Vargas said. “We cannot allow the Attorney General to impede the vital work we do to support the refugees who are our neighbors, colleagues, and friends.”
The attorney general’s office did not respond to a request for comment.
Rokita announced on Sept. 8 that his office had served Exodus with a civil investigation demand. In the press release, Rokita described Exodus as offering services to “illegal aliens” through its offices in Indianapolis and Bloomington and said he was seeking information about “possible interference with federal immigration activities” in Monroe County earlier this year.
The attorney general did not provide a copy of the CID sent to Exodus, but in its lawsuit, the nonprofit details some of the content of the investigative demand.
According to the complaint, the attorney general stated in the CID that it believes Exodus may have materials or knowledge relevant to an investigation being conducted “concerning human labor trafficking, indecent nuisances, false claims, and Exodus Refugee’s abuse of authority as a nonprofit.”
Also, the CID ordered Exodus to respond to 39 separate interrogatories and 28 separate requests for production of documents, which was required to be turned over by Sept. 29. However, the lawsuit notes the attorney general does not provide an explanation or information regarding the allegations but rather is focused on Exodus’s advocacy efforts and work with refugees and immigrants. The information being sought includes documents and records related to services and programs for the migrants, an account of the funding provided for resettling the migrants, and all policies and practices regarding interacting with ICE, along with all communications concerning ICE operations.
In addition, the lawsuit said, the attorney general is seeking an “overwhelming array” of other information, which Exodus claimed would be injurious to its operations and its clients. The CID is requiring the production of documents protected by attorney-client privilege, records concerning mental-health counseling Exodus clients have received, materials that contain information which can only be released with the client’s written permission, communications with community partners, and documents on landlords and employers who work with Exodus and its clients.
“The press (release) and the CID make it clear that Exodus is being targeted not because it has behaved unlawfully but because of its association with immigrants and refugees, the advocacy efforts on behalf of its clients, and the communication it has had with its clients and on their behalf,” Exodus said in its lawsuit. “Exodus is being targeted because of the protected First Amendment activities and expression that it engages in to further its goals and mission and to assist its clients.”
The lawsuit filed by Exodus may be the first to challenge a CID issued by the attorney general since last fall when his office began publicly sending the demand letters to municipalities, nonprofits, businesses and universities across the state.
None of the 10 other entities that Rokita has identified as receiving civil investigative demands appear to have sued the attorney general, according to a search of online case management systems for the federal district courts in Indiana and the state courts.
In 2024, the Indiana General Assembly amended a state statute to give the attorney general the ability to enforce the provisions in Indiana law regarding citizenship and immigration status and compliance with federal immigration laws. Even before the new law took effect on July 1, 2024, Rokita sent warning letters to the common councils of East Chicago and Gary and law enforcement agencies in West Lafayette and Monroe County, demanding they rescind what he called their “sanctuary cities” policies.
Rokita first announced his office had sent civil investigative demands over “sanctuary city” policies in October 2024. A press release from the attorney general claimed he was using the CIDs to determine whether the immigration enforcement policies of the Seymour and South Bend police departments complied with state law.
A little more than two weeks later, Rokita announced he was investigating “potential labor trafficking networks” in certain communities as well as what he called a “largescale (sic.) influx of illegal aliens” in Evansville, Logansport and Seymour. He also said he had served CIDs to the Cass County Health Department, Logansport Community School Corp., Berry Global Group Inc., Tent Partnership for Refugees, God is Good and Jackson County Industrial Development Corp.
Rokita followed that by highlighting a civil investigative demand he had sent to Tyson Foods in Logansport. The announcement was the attorney general was telling the meat-processing company to “answer tough questions on employment of illegal aliens” and was “seeking information related to human labor trafficking.”
This year, Rokita has used CIDs to push back on diversity, equity and inclusion programs and policies. He announced in May and June that he was launching inquiries into the University of Notre Dame, Butler University and DePauw University to determine whether their DEI policies were violating federal and state civil rights laws. As part of the inquiry, he sent letters to each school asking for extensive documents and communications regarding admissions and hiring practices, employee trainings, allocation of funds, and strategic priorities.
Rokita publicly disclosed in August his office had served civil investigative demands to Notre Dame and Butler. Although the demand letters indicated the universities had responded, the attorney general said neither had provided the information on their DEI policies and practices that he had previously requested.
Already, Rokita has taken legal action against Berry Global, an Evansville-based maker of plastic food-storage packaging products, for noncompliance with the CID. In April 2025, the attorney general’s office filed a lawsuit in Vanderburgh County Superior Court against the manufacturer to enforce the civil investigative demand.
The court filings have been sealed so only the judge’s orders are available to the public. Even so, the docket reveals the Haitian Center of Evansville, which said it received a CID from the attorney general in November 2024, successfully filed a motion to intervene in the Berry Global case. Also, the proceeding has been presided over by five judges. The first stepped aside after the attorney general’s office filed a change-of-judge motion, and the three others have all recused themselves for conflicts of interest.
In July, the court did hold a hearing on the motion from Berry Global to unseal the filings but a ruling has not yet been issued.
Dwight Adams, an editor and writer based in Indianapolis, edited this article. He is a former content editor, copy editor and digital producer at The Indianapolis Star and IndyStar.com, and worked as a planner for other newspapers, including the Louisville Courier Journal.
The Indiana Citizen is a nonpartisan, nonprofit platform dedicated to increasing the number of informed and engaged Hoosier citizens. We are operated by the Indiana Citizen Education Foundation, Inc., a 501(c)(3) public charity. For questions about the story, contact Marilyn Odendahl at marilyn.odendahl@indianacitizen.org.
