The Fifth Circuit’s dismissal signals the end of Biden-era privacy protections for reproductive health data under HIPAA.
On September 10, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit dismissed an appeal concerning the vacating of provisions of the HIPAA reproductive health care privacy regulations. The dismissal stems from the case Purl v. Department of Health & Human Services, in which a federal district court in Texas ruled in June 2025 that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) had exceeded its authority in issuing heightened privacy protections for reproductive health data under HIPAA.
Although HHS chose not to appeal the decision, a group of proposed intervenors, including the cities of Columbus (Ohio), Madison (Wisconsin), and Doctors for America, attempted to step in and defend the rule. They later withdrew their appeal, leading the Fifth Circuit to formally dismiss the case.
The rule at the center of the dispute, the “HIPAA Privacy Rule To Support Reproductive Health Care Privacy,” was introduced in 2024 following the Supreme Court’s Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision. It tried to reinforce protections for reproductive health data, including a new attestation requirement to limit disclosures of protected health information (PHI) related to lawfully provided reproductive health care.
The original lawsuit, filed by a physician in Texas, argued that the rule conflicted with state laws, particularly child abuse reporting obligations. A preliminary injunction was granted, and in June 2025, the district court struck down the provisions of the rule concerning reproductive care, though it left unrelated updates to Notices of Privacy Practices intact.
The proposed intervenors had sought to appeal both the court’s denial of their motion to intervene and the vacating of the rule, but on September 4, they requested to voluntarily dismiss the appeal. The court granted that request on September 10.
In a September 2 letter to the Fifth Circuit, the federal government confirmed that it would not appeal the district court’s summary judgment ruling. The proposed intervenors noted that dismissing the appeal would “conserve the resources of the parties and the courts.”
Although HHS has not issued formal guidance since the court’s decision, it is reportedly reviewing the implications and may provide further clarification or revise its regulatory approach.
It tried to strengthen protections for PHI related to reproductive health care, including requiring attestations before certain disclosures could be made.
The district court found that HHS exceeded its legal authority in implementing the reproductive health privacy provisions under existing HIPAA statutes.
They can request to intervene, but courts must approve. In this case, the proposed intervenors' request was denied, and their subsequent appeal was later withdrawn.
Only the updates related to Notices of Privacy Practices remain. The reproductive health-specific provisions and attestation requirements were vacated.
It's unclear. HHS has indicated it is reviewing the implications of the court’s ruling, but has not announced new guidance or regulatory plans as of now.