What were the legal outcomes (lawsuits, settlements, FBI inquiries) tied to allegations against Bill Clinton?

1. Clinton v. Jones — a constitutional ruling that opened the courthouse door

The Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in Clinton v. Jones rejected the claim of absolute presidential immunity for unofficial conduct and allowed Paula Jones’s civil suit to proceed while Clinton was in office, establishing the legal path that made later depositions and settlement possible ^{[5] [6]}.

2. Paula Jones lawsuit and the $850,000 settlement

Paula Jones sued in 1994 alleging sexual harassment from an incident in 1991; the litigation culminated in an out‑of‑court settlement in November 1998 in which Clinton paid $850,000 while expressly acknowledging no wrongdoing and offering no apology, and Jones dropped her appeal after the settlement ^{[1] [3] [7]}.

3. From a civil case to an expanded independent counsel probe and impeachment dynamics

Evidence developed in the Jones litigation — notably, testimony and documents concerning Monica Lewinsky — prompted Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr to broaden his inquiry; Starr’s report alleged perjury and obstruction tied to Clinton’s denials under oath and helped trigger impeachment proceedings in Congress, though the ultimate criminal prosecutions for these allegations did not proceed to conviction against Clinton on the sexual‑misconduct claims in the sources provided ^{[1] [3]}.

4. Professional sanctions recommended and administered, not criminal convictions

The Independent Counsel’s work produced a set of non‑criminal “alternative sanctions” including findings about false testimony and references to professional discipline; reporting cites a five‑year suspension of Clinton’s license to practice law and a $25,000 fine as among the consequences imposed by a circuit court proceeding tied to that process ^[2]. The sources describe disciplinary and remedial measures rather than a criminal sentence for the president ^[2].

5. Other named accusers and investigative conclusions — mixed findings

Several other women publicly accused Clinton — including Kathleen Willey and Juanita Broaddrick — and the independent counsel’s work concluded that Willey provided statements inconsistent with sworn testimony on related matters, a determination the reporting summarizes as “false information” to investigators; those findings influenced public perception but, in the cited material, did not produce criminal convictions of Clinton tied to those allegations ^{[3] [8]}.

6. Separate inquiries into Clinton-related institutions and disputes over FBI/DOJ handling

Congressional and oversight claims about the Clinton Foundation and other Clinton‑linked matters spawned FBI and DOJ activity that, according to records and later oversight releases, involved decisions by FBI headquarters and Main Justice leaders to limit or halt certain investigative steps, a narrative assembled in declassified timelines and oversight releases cited by Republican senators and outlets alleging that field offices were restrained from subpoenas or interviews ^{[4] [9]}. Those records are contested and framed by their sources as evidence of interference or countervailing managerial decisions; the cited reporting does not present a final criminal judgment against the Foundation in these excerpts ^{[4] [9]}.

7. Recent congressional subpoenas and contempt threats tied to Epstein files

In 2026, Republican House investigators subpoenaed Bill and Hillary Clinton in their Jeffrey Epstein probe; the Clintons refused to testify, calling the inquiry partisan, and House Republicans moved toward contempt proceedings — an enforcement and oversight standoff rather than a new criminal adjudication in the public reporting cited ^{[10] [11]}.

Conclusion — legal outcomes characterized by civil settlement, disciplinary measures, investigative controversy, no criminal convictions in cited records

Taken together, the documented legal outcomes in the supplied reporting are a public civil settlement in Paula Jones’s case, a Supreme Court precedent permitting suits against a sitting president, independent‑counsel findings and professional discipline recommendations, contested FBI/DOJ investigative records about Clinton‑linked matters, and congressional enforcement actions — but no criminal conviction of Bill Clinton for the sexual‑misconduct allegations is established in the provided sources ^{[1] [7] [2] [4] [10]}.