ST. LOUIS — Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey has succeeded in three separate court battles against clinics across the state regarding gender transition interventions on children and forcing them to comply with investigations.
The latest ruling involves Planned Parenthood-St. Louis. The previous rulings involved Planned Parenthood-Great Plains and Children's Mercy.
The court grants Planned Parenthood's Motion in part, ordering the production of documents not protected by HIPAA. Similarly, Bailey's Motion is granted in part, allowing access to documents not shielded by HIPAA regulations.
"It’s a big day here in Missouri, as the Court just ordered Planned Parenthood-St. Louis to turn over documents relating to gender transition interventions they performed on minors," Bailey said in a statement. "My team will get to the bottom of how this clandestine network of clinics has subjected children to puberty blockers and irreversible surgery, often without parental consent."
Bailey said the investigations will continue to be done thoroughly.
"There is no more important fight than to ensure Missouri is the safest state in the nation for children," Bailey said. "No stone will be left unturned in these investigations."
Judge Michael Stelzer of the 22nd Judicial Court noted in his judgment that the court deliberated over the case involving Planned Parenthood-St. Louis and then issued its ruling.
On March 14, 2023, Planned Parenthood-St. Louis received a Civil Investigation Demand (CID) from Bailey as part of an investigation into certain transgender care services. Planned Parenthood contests the CID, alleging it lacks authorization and clarity.
"Defendant's CID request contained fifty-four (54) separate requests with an additional fifteen (15) subparts," Stelzer wrote. "Plaintiff argues that said CID request should be set aside because the CID is unauthorized and, vague. Plaintiff further argues that Defendant has failed to show how Plaintiff is directly involved in his investigation and therefore should not be allowed to request said documents via a CID."
Additionally, Planned Parenthood argued that Bailey has not demonstrated Planned Parenthood's direct involvement in the investigation, questioning the legitimacy of the CID request.
Bailey maintains that the CID should stand based on allegations of intentional malpractices and dishonesty in Planned Parenthood's medical and billing procedures.
While the court acknowledges the broad authority conferred by the MMPA, it does not supersede federal law, particularly regarding access to federally protected documents such as medical records governed by HIPAA.
Despite Defendant's entitlement to certain documents under the MMPA, HIPAA safeguards patients' privacy rights, which Planned Parenthood cannot waive on their behalf.
While Bailey's investigative powers under the MMPA are recognized, they do not override federal statutes protecting sensitive information like medical records, the judgment states.
"While the Court agrees that the CID and MMPA grants Defendant broad investigative powers, it does not grant Defendant the authority to access federally protected documents," Stelzer wrote in the judgment. "Additionally, this Court does not have the authority to override any federal law...In this case, the right to privacy as it relates to medical records belongs to the patient and therefore cannot be waived by Plaintiff on each patient's behalf."
Thus, the court's ruling ensures compliance with both state and federal laws, safeguarding the rights of all parties involved.