State of Texas v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and Purl, M.D. v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

Public Rights Project, with Democracy Forward and Debevoise & Plimpton LLP, are representing the cities of Columbus, Ohio, and Madison, Wisconsin, in their motion to intervene as defendants in Purl, M.D. et al. v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services et al. in Texas.

The case relates to longstanding federal protections established under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). In Texas, Attorney General Ken Paxton is challenging a 24-year-old regulation that serves as the foundation for medical privacy nationwide, as well as a 2024 rule strengthening reproductive health care privacy. Reproductive health information is particularly sensitive and jeopardized by recent uncertainty arising from legal changes and differences in laws between and among states.

The cities and doctors contend that eliminating these patient protections would pave the way for government investigations of private health information and threaten the well-being of individuals across the country.

Update:
On May 5, 2025, Public Rights Project filed an amicus brief on behalf of Doctors for America and the cities of Columbus, Ohio, and Madison, Wis., in the Northern Texas District Court (Amarillo Division), along with co-counsel Democracy Forward and Debevoise & Plimpton LLP, defending the 2024 HIPAA Privacy Rule. The rule protects the privacy of Americans’ reproductive health care information. The brief was filed in response to the Alliance for Defending Freedom (ADF)’s attempts to upend HIPAA privacy protections and strike down the 2024 HIPAA Privacy Rule in Purl, M.D. et al. v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services et al.

Read the amicus brief.

On June 13, 2025,  we notified the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals that we plan to challenge a decision that blocked the cities of Columbus, Ohio and Madison, Wis., and the association Doctors for America, from joining the lawsuit. A private doctor plaintiff is challenging a 2024 rule strengthening reproductive health care privacy.

Columbus and Madison argue that without these protections, government investigations into private medical decisions could become a reality and threaten the well-being of individuals and impede cities’ public health efforts across the country.