A federal judge has struck down a rule that was adopted during the presidency of Joe Biden that protected abortion and gender transition patient records.
The ruling has now opened the door for state authorities to access sensitive medical data, and it has reignited debates over patient privacy and reproductive rights.
Judge Blocks Biden Rule
U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk in Amarillo, Texas, ruled that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) exceeded its authority when it adopted the regulation last year. The rule prevented healthcare providers and insurers from disclosing legal abortion information to state law enforcement pursuing criminal cases.
“HHS lacked clear delegated authority to fashion special protections for medical information produced by politically favoured medical procedures,” Kacsmaryk wrote. The rule was temporarily blocked in December when Kacsmaryk ruled in favour of Texas doctor Carmen Purl, who filed the lawsuit. Wednesday’s decision expands the block nationwide.
Purl is represented by Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative Christian legal group. Matt Bowman, senior counsel for the group, praised the ruling, stating that the regulation “would have weaponised laws about privacy that have nothing to do with abortion or gender identity.” HHS has not issued a public response.
Legal Fight Intensifies
The Biden administration issued the rule as part of its response to the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision overturning Roe v. Wade, which eliminated federal constitutional protections for abortion. Republican-led states like Texas have since implemented tighter restrictions and sought to penalise out-of-state abortions.
When introducing the rule, Biden said, “No one should have their medical records used against them, their doctor, or their loved one just because they sought or received lawful reproductive health care.” Texas has filed a separate lawsuit that remains pending.
Meanwhile, HHS leadership appointed during Trump’s term continues to review its position as the legal fight over abortion access escalates. The ruling leaves patients and providers uncertain as states push for broader access to private medical records.