Lawmakers and state Attorneys General have penned letters to Xavier Becerra, the U.S.
Lawmakers and Attorneys General oppose the proposed HIPAA Privacy Rule revision aiming to strengthen privacy protections for reproductive health information. They express concerns about the potential impact of the changes and advocate for stronger safeguards.
Lawmakers Express Criticism Over the HIPAA Privacy Rule Change, Arguing That it Falls Short in Adequately Safeguarding Patient Privacy
Senators Wyden, Murray, and Rep. Jacobs have written to the HHS Secretary regarding the proposed HIPAA Privacy Rule changes. They want HHS to protect all categories of PHI, not just reproductive health information.
The proposed changes enhance PHI protection but lawmakers say more comprehensive privacy measures are needed. Moreover, they emphasize privacy comparable to phone calls, emails, text messages, and geolocation data. Their main concern is to shield Americans from unwarranted government surveillance.
The lawmakers emphasize patients’ trust in the highest level of confidentiality with healthcare providers. The current HIPAA Privacy Rule doesn’t force healthcare professionals to testify about patients’ medical conditions. However, law enforcement can subpoena medical records without probable cause or independent judicial oversight. The absence of safeguards endangers patients’ legal protections, especially with meticulous digital health record documentation.
To address these concerns, the lawmakers request the HHS to revise the proposed Privacy Rule change. They advocate for law enforcement to obtain a warrant before accessing patients’ records from healthcare providers. Lawmakers seek to replace current HIPAA disclosures with search warrants based on probable cause. They suggest prohibiting law enforcement from sharing disclosed medical records with other agencies unless relevant to the investigation. Lawmakers insist on notifying individuals about PHI disclosure to law enforcement, aligning with federal law and the Fourth Amendment.
Lawmakers stress private healthcare decisions, seeking to prevent rogue state Attorneys General from accessing health records. The letter bears the signatures of several Senators and Congress members, reflecting widespread support for these privacy concerns.
Nineteen State Attorneys General Assert That the Proposed Change to the Reproductive Health Information Privacy Rule is Illegal
While some lawmakers express concerns that the Biden Administration’s plans lack sufficient protection for Americans’ privacy, others are contesting the proposed change to the HIPAA Privacy Rule aimed at restricting disclosures of reproductive health information to law enforcement. They argue that such changes could impede the enforcement of state laws and hinder investigations into illegal abortions. In response, Tennessee Attorney General, Jonathan Skemetti, along with 18 other state Attorneys General from Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, and Utah, have written a letter to the HHS Secretary opposing the proposed HIPAA Privacy Rule change.
State Attorneys General argue that the Supreme Court’s decision on abortion rights allows states to enact restrictive laws. They believe the court’s decision empowers states to restrict or prohibit abortions. Updating HIPAA could hinder enforcing state laws on reproductive health information disclosure. States, like Tennessee with abortion bans, couldn’t access info on residents who go out-of-state for abortions. Moreover, such states wouldn’t obtain data on residents evading local laws to obtain abortion procedures.
Attorney General Skemetti’s Concerns and Opposition to the Proposed Rule
In the letter, Attorney General Skemetti disputes the Biden Administration’s portrayal of states as treating pregnant women as criminals and healthcare professionals as wrongdoers. He believes that the proposed HIPAA update is unlawful, unnecessary, and driven by a false narrative. Skemetti argues that the rule change is an attempt to undermine the Constitution and previous Supreme Court decisions on abortion rights.
Moreover, the broad definition of “reproductive healthcare” in the proposed rule raises concerns about its potential impact on state authorities’ ability to investigate child abuse cases and other serious crimes. Skemetti expresses concern about the rule obstructing state laws on experimental gender-transition procedures for minors. He sees it aligned with the Biden Administration’s “radical transgender policy goals.”
Skemetti emphasizes that Federal HIPAA laws safeguarded Americans’ privacy for over two decades, ensuring health data confidentiality. However, he points out that HIPAA permits the disclosure of health information to law enforcement and state authorities for safeguarding public health, safety, and welfare. The proposed change, according to Skemetti, would hinder states from fulfilling this important duty. The Attorneys General demand withdrawal of the proposed rule, claiming it’s unlawful and beyond HHS’s authority. They assert the rule exceeds HHS’s statutory powers.
