The case centers on Indiana's Terminated Pregnancy Report statute, which requires healthcare providers to submit at least 31 pieces of information about patients, procedures, and providers whenever an abortion is performed in the state. Dr. Christina Scifres, a physician, is challenging the law along with the Indiana Department of Health Commissioner and members of the state's Medical Licensing Board.
Judge Young identified a potential split in how the reporting requirements might be analyzed under HIPAA's public health exception. He noted that while some required information like 'the patient's age, the patient's previous births, and the gestation of the fetus' could fall under public health reporting, other data such as 'the health care provider's full name, the location of the facility where the abortion was performed, and the manner in which the abortion was performed' might relate more to 'law enforcement oversight.'
The order comes amid summary judgment briefing in the case, with Judge Young directing the parties to address two specific questions about HIPAA's scope and whether conflict preemption analysis would be precluded if the statute falls within federal health privacy protections.
The supplemental briefs are limited to 15 pages, with the plaintiff's opening brief due May 1 and defendants' response due May 22. The case represents another front in ongoing litigation over state abortion regulations and their intersection with federal health privacy laws.