Connect with us

Business

Column: How a legal loophole allows antiabortion prosecutors to obtain women's secret health data

Published

on

Column: How a legal loophole allows antiabortion prosecutors to obtain women's secret health data

The American legal system has a message for women concerned about their abortion rights: Don’t make the mistake of thinking that your pharmacist is your friend.

Thanks to a gaping loophole in federal healthcare regulations, some of our leading drug store chains turn over customers’ most sensitive private healthcare information to law enforcement agencies, even without a warrant.

That’s the finding of a subcommittee headed by Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), which learned that all eight of the nation’s largest pharmacy chains have routinely turned over prescription records of thousands of Americans to law enforcement agencies or other government entities secretly without a warrant.

Medical care procured outside a patient’s home state increasingly leaves a digital trail that will easily make its way back to the patient’s domicile.

— Carleen M. Zubrzycki, University of Connecticut

Advertisement

The chains are CVS, Walgreens, Cigna, Optum Rx, Walmart, Kroger, Rite Aid and Amazon. CVS, Kroger and Rite Aid, which have a total of about 11,000 locations nationwide, don’t require store staff to run the requests past company lawyers before complying.

Only Amazon notifies customers that it received a subpoena or warrant for their prescription data.

Wyden’s committee sought briefings from the pharmacy chains after the Supreme Court’s 2022 Dobbs decision overturned nationwide abortion rights.

Since then, Wyden told me by email, “Republican states across the country have criminalized abortion.” That placed privacy “under threat like never before.” He said his goal is to urge “the executive branch to do everything in its power to stop far-right prosecutors and politicians from using women’s private records against them.”

The briefings, Wyden and fellow subcommittee Democrats informed Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra in a Dec. 12 letter, “made clear that these companies’ privacy practices vary widely, in ways that seriously impact patient privacy.”

Advertisement

None of the pharmacies require a warrant before turning over requested data; all “will turn medical records over in response to a mere subpoena,” which often doesn’t have to be signed by a judge.

That’s a flaw in the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, which purports to protect individuals’ health information from disclosure by providers except in narrow circumstances.

CVS spokeswoman Amy Thibault told me by email, “HIPAA does not require law enforcement to obtain a warrant or judge-issued subpoena before they make a lawful request for records containing PHI.” She said that CVS staff “are trained how to appropriately respond to lawful requests from regulatory agencies and law enforcement.”

HIPAA applies to pharmacies as well as physicians and hospitals. What sets them apart, however, is the breadth of their networks— it’s a rare hospital or physician’s practice that maintains a database that can be accessed coast to coast.

Wyden and his colleagues urged Becerra to tighten HIPAA regulations to require pharmacies to “insist on a warrant” before turning over private health data, so that law enforcement agencies have to defend their demands in court.

Advertisement

Some of America’s leading drug store chains turn over customers medical records to law enforcement agencies without even requiring a warrant, exposing women seeking abortions to prosecution by anti-abortion states.

(Senate Finance Committee)

Health and Human Services isn’t the only agency concerned with the misuse of personal data. The Federal Trade Commission on Tuesday charged the data broker Outlogic with selling consumers’ location information extracted from smartphone apps without their permission.

The geolocation data, the FTC said, “could be used to track people’s visits to sensitive locations such as medical and reproductive health clinics, places of religious worship and domestic abuse shelters.” According to a statement by FTC Chair Lina Khan, in at least one contract the company had tracked “Ohio residents who visited specific doctors, including cardiologists, gastroenterologists, or endocrinologists, and then pharmacies or specialty infusion centers.”

Advertisement

The FTC’s legal complaint said the result could include “loss of privacy, exposure to discrimination, physical violence, emotional distress, and other harms.”

In a settlement with Outlogic reached Tuesday, the FTC prohibited the company from selling or sharing any “sensitive location data,” including data involving “locations that provide services to LGBTQ+ people such as bars or service organizations,” “locations of public gatherings of individuals at political or social demonstrations or protests” and data that could be used “to determine the identity or location of a specific individual.”

Outlogic will also have to delete or destroy any such data already collected, and provide consumers with easy ways to refuse permission for their data to be sold and to find out to whom it has already been sold.

Becerra hasn’t responded to the committee’s letter, but his agency did launch a rule-making procedure in April aimed at prohibiting the disclosure of personal information about a person’s reproductive healthcare by a provider, including a pharmacy, in a state where the healthcare is legal, but sought for an investigation or prosecution in a state where it’s banned.

But the Health and Human Services initiative is still only a proposal, not a rule. Several factors have made it more urgent.

Advertisement

The so-called interoperability of medical data is generally reckoned to be a good thing. Pharmacists should have access to the full range of a customer’s prescriptions, for example, so they can watch out for dangerous interactions among medicines that may have been missed by doctors, especially if one patient is treated by multiple physicians.

Those checks have been made even easier by the growth of national drug chains, which have supplanted the mom-and-pop drugstores that used to be common in America. Now one database can provide patient information to thousands of affiliated pharmacists coast to coast.

But the Supreme Court’s overturning of abortion rights in 2022 converted that boon into a potential peril by turning judgments about medical procedures over to the states.

“There are now categories of care in which states have taken dramatically different approaches to whether that care should be available,” says Carmel Shachar, an expert on health law and policy at Harvard Law School. Abortion is the most evident area, but divergences in state law increasingly apply to gender-affirming care and substance abuse treatment.

Those divergences, Shachar told me, make the relevant medical records especially sensitive to the point where they need to be protected from law enforcement.

Advertisement

But expansive databases may make that difficult — a prosecutor in antiabortion Texas might be prevented by a medical shield law from accessing data about a Texan’s legal treatment in Massachusetts, but theoretically could subpoena it from a pharmarcy chain’s branch in Texas.

The challenge goes beyond simply shielding direct evidence of a legal abortion — such as a prescription for mifepristone — from prying law enforcement eyes in an antiabortion state.

“There’s a perception that abortions or gender-affirming care exist on their own islands separate from other medical care,” Shachar says. “But somebody who is medically literate can read between the lines of a medical record to see if an abortion happened.”

For instance, consider if a medical record showed that a woman was pregnant and records show a bit later that she’s begun to take chemotherapy treatment for cancer that would be incompatible with pregnancy.

“That might be suggestive that she was pregnant and is no longer pregnant, with no baby to show for it,” Shachar says. “How much of a medical record you need to protect to truly protect the privacy of people who have had abortions or gender-affirming care is murky.”

Advertisement

Placing a legal moat around medical records of an out-of-state abortion may be difficult. “Medical care procured outside a patient’s home state increasingly leaves a digital trail that will easily make its way back to the patient’s domicile,” observed Carleen M. Zubrzycki of the University of Connecticut in a 2022 law review paper.

When any such patient “receives any subsequent medical care — abortion-related or not — in her state of residence,” she wrote, “the odds are high that her home-state providers will access and incorporate her entire medical record into their own records.” That would undermine the efforts of safe-haven states to protect visiting patients by providing “slam-dunk evidence that could be used in out-of-state litigation to punish abortions.”

The determination of antiabortion activist politicians to narrow women’s reproductive healthcare options is explicit and persistent.

On July 7, 2022 — just two weeks after the Supreme Court handed down the Dobbs decision — a dozen right-wing Texas state legislators warned the Dallas law firm Sidley Austin that it might face criminal charges for having “decided to reimburse the travel costs of employees who leave Texas to murder their unborn children” — i.e., who leave Texas to obtain legal abortions elsewhere.

Last February, the attorneys general of 20 red states, led by Missouri Atty. Gen. Andrew Bailey, sent threatening letters to CVS, Walgreens, Rite Aid, Albertsons, Walmart, Kroger and Costco warning them that federal law prohibited them from using the mail to distribute drugs for medication abortion, such as mifepristone.

Advertisement

The letters cited the antique and long-discredited 1873 statute known as the Comstock Act after its bluenosed progenitor. The law’s applicability to abortion rights has long been dismissed by legal scholars. But it was at the core of a ruling by U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk of Texas invalidating the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of mifepristone.

The FDA’s rules on mifepristone, which allow the drug to be taken by patients outside a hospital or doctor’s office, are currently before the Supreme Court.

The quest by antiabortion prosecutors for data pertaining to out-of-state medical procedures is destined to grow. The proportion of patients traveling out of their home states to obtain abortions has doubled over the last three years to 20% in the first six months of 2023 from 10% in the same period in 2020, according to the Guttmacher Institute.

The rate is especially high in safe-haven states bordered by antiabortion states, such as Illinois, where out-of-state patients increased in early 2023 to 18,870 from 5,570 three years earlier. New Mexico and Colorado experienced sharp increases for the same reason. In California, where abortions increased by 15,200 in the statistical period, only 16% of the increase was due to out-of-state patients — presumably because abortion is legal in the nearby states of Nevada, Oregon and Washington.

What is becoming clear as state legislators take advantage of the Supreme Court’s evisceration of medical privacy rights in the Dobbs decision, is that the stakes are destined to become magnified in the absence of federal action. People suffering from infectious diseases linked to what legislators disdain as immoral behavior such as HIV or hepatitis C might face increased discrimination or limits on access to public healthcare programs, for example.

Advertisement

“In terms of states diverging in what medical care is allowed or isn’t allowed,” Shachar says, “abortion and gender-affirming care might be the tip of the iceberg.”

Business

Disneyland Park attendance reaches 900 million over 70 years in business

Published

on

Disneyland Park attendance reaches 900 million over 70 years in business

Disneyland, the iconic tourist destination that transformed the entertainment landscape in Southern California, has reached a new milestone: 900 million people have visited the park since its opening in 1955.

The latest attendance figure was described in a new documentary called “Disneyland Handcrafted,” chronicling the creation of the theme park. The film, which includes footage from the Walt Disney Archives, will stream on Disney+.

In 2024 — the most recent year data was available — Disneyland’s attendance ticked up 0.5% to 17.3 million, according to a report from the Themed Entertainment Assn. Like many other theme parks, Disney does not release internal attendance figures.

Walt Disney Co.’s theme parks, cruise ships and vacation resorts have been a key economic driver for the Burbank media and entertainment company.

Last year, almost 57% of the company’s operating income was generated by the tourism and leisure segment, known as Disney’s “experiences” business. That sector reported revenue of $36.2 billion for fiscal year 2025, a 6% bump compared to the previous year. Operating income increased 8% to nearly $10 billion.

Advertisement

Disney has said it will invest $60 billion into its experiences segment, underscoring the importance of that business to the company. At Disneyland Resort in Anaheim, that could mean at least $1.9 billion of development on projects including an expansion of the Avengers Campus and a “Coco”-themed boat ride at Disney California Adventure, as well as an “Avatar”-inspired area.

Over its 70 years, Disneyland has undergone many changes and expansions. Though some of its original attractions still exist, including Peter Pan’s Flight, Dumbo the Flying Elephant and the Mark Twain Riverboat, the park has evolved to align more with its Hollywood cinematic properties and expanded in 2019 to include a “Star Wars”-themed land.

Continue Reading

Business

How bits of Apple history can be yours

Published

on

How bits of Apple history can be yours

In March 1976, Apple cofounders Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak both signed a $500 check weeks before the official creation of a California company that would transform personal computing and become a global powerhouse.

Now that historic Wells Fargo check could be sold for $500,000 at an auction that ends on Jan. 29. The sale, run by RR Auction, includes some of Apple’s early items and childhood belongings of Jobs, Apple’s cofounder and chief executive, who died in 2011 at 56, after battling pancreatic cancer.

Since its founding, the Cupertino tech giant has attracted millions of fans who buy its laptops, smartphones, headphones and smart watches. The auction gives the adoring public a chance to own part of the company’s history ahead of Apple’s 50th anniversary in April.

Apple’s first check from March 1976 predates the company’s official founding in April 1976. It also includes the signatures of Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak.

(RR Auction)

Advertisement

“Without a doubt, check number one is the most important piece of paper in Apple’s history,” said Corey Cohen, a computer historian and Apple-1 expert, in a video about the item. At the time, Apple’s cofounders, he added, were “putting everything on the line.”

Cohen said he’s known of a governor, entrepreneurs, award-winning filmmakers and musicians who own rare Apple collectibles. Jobs is a “cult of personality,” and people collect items tied to the tech mogul.

“This is a very important collection that’s being sold because there are a lot of personal items, a lot of things that weren’t generally available to the public before, because these things are coming right out of Jobs’ home,” he said in an interview.

RR Auction said it couldn’t share the names of the consignors on the check and some of the other auction items.

Advertisement

As of Monday, bids on the check surpassed $200,000. Jobs typically didn’t sign autographs, so owning a document bearing his signature is rare.

Other items up for auction include Apple’s March 1976 Wells Fargo account statement — the company’s first financial document — and an Apple-1 computer prototype board used to validate Apple’s first computer.

The auction features a variety of memorabilia, including vintage Apple posters, Apple rainbow glasses, letters, magazines, older Apple computers, and other historic items.

Apple didn’t respond to a request for comment.

Some of Jobs’ personal items came from his stepbrother, John Chovanec, who had preserved them for decades.

Advertisement

The items provide “a rare view” into Jobs’ “private world and formative years outside Apple’s corporate narrative,” a news release about the auction said.

Jobs’ bedroom desk from his family’s Los Altos home, which housed a garage where Apple-1 computers were put together, is also up for sale.

Papers from Jobs’ years before Apple are inside the desk and the highest bid on that item has surpassed $44,000.

An auction celebrating Apple's upcoming 50th anniversary includes late Apple co-founder Steve Jobs' belongings.

A bedroom desk that belonged to late Apple cofounder Steve Jobs provides a glimpse into his early years before he created the tech company.

(RR Auction)

Advertisement

Bids on an Apple business card on which Jobs writes “Hi, I’m back” in black ink to his father reached more than $22,200. The card features Apple’s colorful logo alongside Jobs’ title as chairman, a role he returned to in 2011, according to the auction site.

Other items include 8-track tapes that featured music from artists such as Bob Dylan. Bids on a 1977 vintage poster featuring a red Apple that hung in Jobs family’s living room top $16,600, the auction site shows.

While Jobs is known for donning a black turtleneck, he also wore bow ties during high school and at Apple’s early events.

An auction to celebrate Apple's upcoming 50th anniversary includes bow ties worn by late Apple cofounder Steve Jobs.

A collection of bow ties that belonged to late Apple co-founder Steve Jobs.

(RR Auction)

Advertisement

Some of Jobs’ bow ties have sold for thousands of dollars at other auctions.

Last year, a pink-and-green striped bow tie he wore when introducing the Macintosh computer in 1984 sold for more than $35,000 at a Julien’s Auctions event that highlighted technology and history.

The items on RR Auction feature colorful clip-on bow ties from Jobs’ bedroom closet.

“This brief fashion phase contrasted sharply with the minimalist black turtleneck and jeans that would later define his public image,” a description of the item states. “The shift reflected Jobs’ evolution from an ambitious young innovator to a visionary with a distinct and enduring personal brand.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

Defiant independence from the Federal Reserve catches Trump off guard

Published

on

Defiant independence from the Federal Reserve catches Trump off guard

White House officials were caught by surprise when a post appeared Sunday night on the Federal Reserve’s official social media channel, with Jerome Powell, its chairman, delivering a plain and clear message.

President Trump was not only weaponizing the Justice Department to intimidate him, Powell said to the camera, standing before an American flag. This time, he added, it wasn’t going to work.

The lack of any warning for officials in the West Wing, confirmed to The Times, was yet another exertion of independence from a Fed chair whose stern resistance to presidential pressure has made him an outlier in Trump’s Washington.

Advertisement
  • Share via

Advertisement

Powell was responding to grand jury subpoenas delivered to the Fed on Friday related to his congressional testimony over the summer regarding construction work at the Reserve.

“The threat of criminal charges is a consequence of the Federal Reserve setting interest rates based on our best assessment of what will serve the public, rather than following the preferences of the president,” Powell said.

“This is about whether the Fed will be able to continue to set interest rates based on evidence and economic conditions,” he added, “or whether instead monetary policy will be directed by political pressure or intimidation.”

For months, Trump and his aides have harshly criticized Powell for his decision-making on interest rates, which the president believes should be dropped faster. On various occasions, Trump has threatened to fire Powell — a move that legal experts, and Powell himself, have said would be illegal — before pulling back.

Advertisement

The Trump administration is currently arguing before the Supreme Court that the president should have the ability to fire the heads of independent agencies at will, despite prior rulings from the high court underscoring the unique independence of the central bank.

The decision by the Justice Department to subpoena the Fed over the construction — a $2.5-billion project to overhaul two Fed buildings, operating unrenovated since the 1930s — comes at a critical juncture for the U.S. economy, which has been issuing conflicting signals over its health.

Employers added only 50,000 jobs last month, fewer than in November, even as the unemployment rate dipped a tenth of a point to 4.4%, for its first decline since June. The figures indicate that businesses aren’t hiring much despite inflation slowing down and growth picking up.

The government reported last month that inflation dropped to an annual rate of 2.7% in November, down from 3% in September, while economic growth rose unexpectedly to an annual rate of 4.3% in the third quarter.

However, the long government shutdown interrupted data collection, lending doubt to the numbers. At the same time, there is uncertainty about the legality of $150 billion or more in tariffs imposed on China and dozens of countries through the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which has been challenged and is under review by the Supreme Court.

Advertisement

As inflation has cooled, the Fed under Powell has incrementally cut the federal funds rate, the target interest rate at which banks lend to one another and the bank’s primary tool for influencing inflation and growth. The Fed held the rate steady at a range of 4.25% to 4.5% through August, before a series of fall cuts left it at 3.5% to 3.75%.

That hasn’t been enough for Trump, who has called for the rate to be lowered faster and to a nearly rock bottom 1%. The last time the central bank dropped the rate so low was in the dark days of the early pandemic in March 2020. It began raising rates in 2022 as inflation took off and proved stubborn despite the bank’s efforts to rein it in.

Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, said there is room to continue lowering the federal funds rate to 3%, where it should be in a “well functioning economy, neither supporting or restraining growth.”

However, muscling the Fed to lower rates and reduce or destroy its independence is another matter.

“There’s no upside to that. It’s all downside, different shades of gray and black, depending on how things unfold,” he said. “It ends in higher inflation and ultimately a much diminished economy and potentially a financial crisis.”

Advertisement

Zandi said much will hinge on the Supreme Court’s decision on whether Trump can remove Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, which he sought to do last year, citing allegations of mortgage fraud she denies.

While Powell’s term as chairman ends in May, his term as a governor — influencing interest-rate decisions — extends to January 2028. A criminal indictment over the construction project could provide Trump the legal justification he needs to remove him altogether.

“When he steps down in May, will he stay on the board or does he leave? That will make a difference,” Zandi said.

A key issue will be how much independence the Fed retains, he said, given the central bank’s role in establishing the U.S. as a safe haven for international bond investors who play a key role funding the federal deficit.

The investors rely on the bank to keep inflation under control, or they will demand the government pay more for its long term bonds — though the subpoenas had little effect so far Monday on bond prices.

Advertisement

“There are scenarios where the bond market says, ‘Oh my gosh, we’re going to see much higher inflation, and there’s a bond sell-off and a spike in long-term rates,” he said. “That’s a crisis.”

Zandi said that even if the worst-case scenarios don’t play out, it will take time for the Federal Reserve to reestablish its reputation as an independent bank not influenced by politics.

“I’m not sure investors will ever forget this,” he said. “Most importantly, it depends on who Trump nominates to be the next chair of the Federal Reserve — and how that person views his or her job.”

Lawmakers from both parties have questioned the motivation behind the investigation.

North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis, a Republican member of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, has said he plans to oppose the confirmation of any nominee for the Fed until the legal matter is “fully resolved.”

Advertisement

“If there were any remaining doubt whether advisers within the Trump administration are actively pushing to end the independence of the Federal Reserve, there should now be none,” Tillis wrote in a social media post.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, the top Democrat on that committee, accused Trump of trying to “install another sock puppet to complete his corrupt takeover of America’s central bank.”

“Trump is abusing the authorities of the Department of Justice like a wannabe dictator so the Fed serves his interests, along with his billionaire friends,” Warren said in a statement.

Rep. French Hill (R-Ark.), the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, also expressed skepticism about the inquiry, which he characterized as an “unnecessary distraction.”

“The Federal Reserve is led by strong, capable individuals appointed by President Trump, and this action could undermine this and future Administrations’ ability to make sound monetary public decisions,” Hill wrote in a statement.

Advertisement

As Hill raised concerns about the investigation, he added he personally knew Powell to be a “person of the highest integrity.”

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), meanwhile, dismissed the idea that the Justice Department was being weaponized against Powell. When asked by a reporter if he thought that was the case, he said: “Of course not.”

Times staff writers Wilner and Ceballos reported from Washington and Darmiento from Los Angeles.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending