A federal district court Sunday granted a Texas doctor an injunction against Biden administration regulations that illegally restrict how doctors can protect patients from the harms of abortion and “gender transition” while a lawsuit proceeds. Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys filed suit on behalf of a Texas physician in October to challenge rule changes by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
The changes to regulations under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act added unprecedented restrictions on doctors’ ability to report abuse and states’ ability to protect children from abortion and harmful drugs and surgeries related to gender confusion. Without authority from the HIPAA statute, the new rule redefined “person” and “public health” to exclude unborn children, and it limited how doctors and law enforcement protect patients from abuse when it involves abortion.
Follow LifeNews on the MeWe social media network for the latest pro-life news free from Facebook’s censorship!
“Doctors and states should be able to protect patients from abuse,” said ADF Senior Counsel Julie Marie Blake. “The court rightly ruled that this unlawful rule change would have weaponized laws about privacy that have nothing to do with abortion or gender identity. The Biden administration attempted to undermine state laws that protect mothers and unborn children from the harms of abortion, and vulnerable children from dangerous and sterilizing procedures like puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and life-altering surgeries. This ruling falls in line with the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs that affirms that states—not unelected bureaucrats—should set abortion policy and be free to protect unborn life.”
In the lawsuit Purl v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Carmen Purl, M.D., a family physician and owner of Dr. Purl’s Fast Care Walk In Clinic in Dumas, Texas, wants to protect her patients by reporting suspected abuse, and to safeguard the health and safety of mothers and children.
“Requiring a doctor … to navigate [the rule’s] requirements and make perplexing legal judgments necessarily limits reporting child abuse,” the court wrote in its opinion. Because the court found the rule is likely “in excess of HIPAA’s statutory authority,” the court barred the federal government from enforcing it against the plaintiffs while the lawsuit proceeds.
