HHS Faces Lawsuit to Stop the Reproductive Health Care Privacy Rule Enforcement

The Office for Civil Rights (OCR), OCR Director Melanie Fontes Rainer, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra, are facing a lawsuit because of the latest change to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) Privacy Law, which supports reproductive health care privacy.

The HIPAA Privacy Law supporting Reproductive Health Care Privacy Final Rule was publicized in the Federal Register on April 26, 2024, and implementation began on June 25, 2024. Covered entities must comply with the new law on December 23, 2024. The purpose of the new law was to reinforce the privacy of reproductive healthcare data and keep HIPAA-covered entities from sharing reproductive healthcare data with authorities when that data is required to investigate or enforce liability on persons or healthcare organizations for seeking, acquiring, or giving legal reproductive health care.

Lawyers from Alliance Defending Freedom filed the lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Amarillo Division. The plaintiffs named in the lawsuit are Carmen Purl, M.D. and Carmen Purl M.D., PLLC, along with its business Dr. Purl’s Fast Care Walk-In Clinic located in Northern Texas. The lawsuit wants injunctive and declaratory relief against the imposition of the final HHS rule.

The lawsuit claims the new rule is illegal and unlawfully limits how physicians can keep their patients safe from abuse. The Texas law requires physicians to report alleged abuse to state officials; nevertheless, the lawsuit claims that the 2024 rule restricts the instances when physicians can provide reproductive health care data to state child welfare organizations and law enforcement services.

The HHS defined “reproductive health care” to include abortion care, and for this reason, the rule was created, because of the revoking Roe v, Wade which took away the right to abortion. The new rule keeps physicians from revealing details about abortion care that is given lawfully to government institutions in states that impose limitations on abortions that seek that data to investigate or enforce liability.

The extensive meaning of reproductive health care indicates it also addresses hormone and drug treatments for gender change/gender dysphoria, along with surgical operations on a person’s reproductive system, which might consist of surgery as a procedure for gender dysphoria. Selected states, like Texas, have enforced bans on these treatments for those under 18.

The lawsuit contends that starting December 23, 2024, the plaintiff can be held back from reporting indications of abuse to state officials for instance when a minor is looking to have an abortion or has been infected with a sexually transmitted disease. The lawsuit likewise claims the 2024 rule will keep the plaintiffs from sending reports to state authorities when a person has gotten illegal gender dysphoria operations like being given cross-sex hormones or has had a sex-change operation. Medical surgery seeking “gender transition” is categorically dangerous to the patient, and could change a person’s healthy physique, bring about negative effects, and aggravate or extend the mental health signs related to gender dysphoria. Dr. Purl likewise is convinced that optional abortion is bad for the mom and the unborn baby, and the two are patients and should be given proper care.

Dr. Purl and her center want to abide by state regulations, however, after December 23, 2024, doing so in the instances mentioned above means an HHS rule violation and would result in financial charges for non-compliance. The lawsuit claims a violation of the following:

• APA, 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(C) because the rule is above statutory jurisdiction or power
• APA, 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(A) because the rule is arbitrary, capricious, abuse discretion, and unlawful.

The lawsuit would like a stay and initial injunctive relief retaining the plaintiffs’ standing and rights as the case is unresolved, and the court would consider the HHS rule illegal, put it away, and once and for all support the defendants and not enforce the rule.

The lawsuit comes after an identical lawsuit submitted by the Texas Attorney General that wants to stop the HHS from imposing the law in Texas because the Texas Attorney General claims the 2024 rule would unlawfully limit the state’s investigations and imposition of state legislation.