Mary Anne Pazanowski reports:
A Texas doctor doesn’t have to comply with a federal privacy rule that protects reproductive health-care information from unauthorized disclosures, a federal judge in the state said.
Carmen Purl demonstrated that she’s likely to win on her claim that the US Department of Health and Human Services exceeded its statutory authority when it adopted the provision, the US District Court for the Northern District of Texas said Sunday. She also showed that she and her medical practice are likely to suffer irreparable harm if the agency enforces the rule against her, Judge Matthew J. Kacsmaryk said.
Read more at Bloomberg Law (sub. req.).
For those not familiar with the case, Dr. Purl sought an injunction against Rule 2024 promulgated by HHS to protect information from disclosure. But Purl argues that the wording of the rule puts her practice in direct conflict with Texas state law requiring her to report suspected child abuse.
Attorney Matt Fisher has more commentary on the decision on his blog, The Pulse. Matt starts by pointing out what may not be obvious to non-lawyers about the narrowness of the decision:
A court in Texas has now granted a preliminary injunction to one covered entity so it does not need to comply with the 2024 Modifications. The key is that the preliminary injunction is not nationwide, but limited solely to the party in the lawsuit.