A federal judge on Wednesday struck down a Biden-era rule that prevented abortion records from being accessed for investigations, finding the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) under the former administration exceeded its powers in adopting it.
It banned health care providers from disclosing to state law enforcement authorities a patient’s protected health information regarding reproductive health care for investigations of any kind.
The rule only applied to situations where the care was provided under lawful circumstances, and not in states where the procedure was banned.
Violators faced criminal penalties including fines and prison time under the rule.
District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk in Amarillo, Texas, said that in adopting the rule, HHS exceeded its powers and unlawfully limited states’ ability to enforce their public health laws.
“In sum, HIPAA confers authority to promulgate regulations protecting ‘individually identifiable health information.’ But it confers no authority to distinguish between types of health information to accomplish political ends like protecting access to abortion and gender-transition procedures,” Kacsmaryk wrote.
“Thus, HHS lacks the authority to issue regulations that enact heightened protections for information about politically favored procedures.”
Biden cited the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision to overturn the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling, which had protected abortion nationwide based on the 14th Amendment’s due process clause, and said that “access to reproductive health care is under attack.”
“By safeguarding patient information, the new rule will help health care providers give complete and accurate information to patients and improve the quality of health care,” Biden said at the time.
The complaint argued that the Biden administration’s rule inserted abortion, gender identity, and other topics into regulations implementing HIPAA, which has “nothing to do with” those topics.
It further argued that the HHS lacked authority to implement the rule, that it was arbitrary and capricious, and could prevent Purl from reporting possible abuse.
“The 2024 Rule’s new provisions concerning ‘person,’ ‘public health,’ and ’reproductive health care' interfere with Dr. Purl’s ability and legal obligation to disclose information about unborn children when they are victims of crime or abuse, to protect unborn children from abuse, neglect, or other victimization, and to protect an unborn child’s health and safety,” the complaint stated.
The complaint listed HHS and its Office for Civil Rights as defendants along with then-HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra and Office for Civil Rights Director Melanie Fontes Rainer.
HHS countered that the rule does not prevent Purl from reporting child abuse and was unlikely to do so in the future because it only forbids the disclosure of an abortion to authorities who are seeking to impose punishment for it.
Wednesday’s decision blocks the rule nationwide.
Texas has launched its own legal challenge against the rule, which is pending in federal court in Lubbock, Texas.
