The U.S. justice system has officially dismissed all sexual assault claims against renowned author Neil Gaiman, particularly because federal judges ruled that they did not have jurisdiction over incidents that allegedly took place in Australia. Scarlett Pavlovich, a caregiver to Gaiman's son, made allegations of sexual assault against the writer, claiming that the incidents occurred four years ago in New Zealand. These claims were filed in several states—including Wisconsin, Massachusetts, and New York—between February 2025 and targeted Gaiman and his wife, Amanda Palmer, also accusing them of human trafficking.

The legal actions initiated by Pavlovich had already raised significant controversy due to their nature and the claims of severe wrongdoing, which included accusations of serious offenses against both Gaiman and Palmer. However, the recent ruling highlights a critical aspect of international jurisdiction where incidents that occur outside the United States complicate the ability of the U.S. courts to address claims brought forth in its legal system. This has been underscored by the swift dismissal from various judges who assessed the appropriate jurisdictional scope regarding the allegations.

Pavlovich had previously sought to withdraw her claims in New York against Palmer, indicating uncertainty about the legal processes concerning jurisdiction in such cases. The dismissal serves as a reminder of the complexities involved in international legal cases and the challenges individuals face in seeking justice for alleged transgressions that occur beyond their home countries. As the discussion continues around jurisdiction and accountability, it raises questions about how legal frameworks can adapt to handle such situations more effectively in the future.