Texas 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 Texas v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services in the Northern District of Texas.

The case relates to federal protections established under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). 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 for America 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.

Read the motion.

Update:

On June 18, a district court in a related case, Purl, M.D. v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, ruled that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services went too far by expanding HIPAA to shield abortion patients’ records. The court vacated the 2024 rule. 

The decision in Purl, M.D. v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services also indicated that other courts are permitted to take up the matter. The court in this case has yet to reach a decision.

In response, the plaintiffs in Texas v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services asked the court in the Northern District of Texas to pause proceedings until the Department of Health and Human Services decides if it will appeal the decision in Purl.

Public Rights Project is assessing next steps.

Read the motion.