SAFER Health Act of 2026
- Sponsor
- Sen. Hirono, Mazie K. [D-HI]
- Committees
- Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jun 24, 2026
Bottom line
The bill aims to significantly strengthen federal privacy protections for sensitive reproductive health information, including abortion and miscarriage care, against unauthorized disclosure in legal contexts.
What it actually does
This bill prohibits healthcare providers and their business associates from disclosing an individual's pregnancy termination or loss information in any legal proceedings without explicit authorization, with narrow exceptions. It also mandates revisions to HITECH Act regulations to prevent information blocking and require health IT developers to segregate this sensitive data. Furthermore, it preempts conflicting state laws while allowing for state laws that provide greater privacy protections.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue this bill is crucial for protecting individuals' privacy in the wake of evolving state laws regarding reproductive healthcare, ensuring that sensitive health data cannot be used in legal proceedings without explicit consent. They contend it closes potential loopholes in existing HIPAA and HITECH regulations and establishes a vital federal privacy floor.
Opponents contend
Opponents might argue that the bill could hinder legitimate law enforcement investigations in specific, rare circumstances, or that it oversteps federal authority by preempting state laws, even those that might seek to access such information for specific legal purposes. Some may also raise concerns about the practicalities and costs of implementing new data segregation requirements for health IT developers.
The bill is very concise and can be read and understood quickly, allowing ample time for informed evaluation.
Section 2(a)(1)
Prohibition on Disclosure of Pregnancy Termination or Loss Information
This provision prohibits covered entities (like healthcare providers) and their business associates from disclosing an individual's pregnancy termination or loss information in any federal, state, local, or Tribal legal proceedings (civil, criminal, administrative, legislative) without the individual's explicit, valid authorization. This significantly restricts how this sensitive health data can be used in legal contexts.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this provision is essential to safeguard patient privacy, particularly in states where reproductive healthcare is restricted, preventing individuals from being criminalized or investigated based on their health records.
Critics contend
Critics might argue that this provision could impede legitimate law enforcement or judicial processes in certain circumstances, potentially hindering investigations related to serious crimes, even if indirectly.
Tradeoffs
Balances individual privacy rights against potential state interests in accessing health information for legal proceedings.
Section 2(a)(2)
Limited Exceptions for Disclosure
This provision carves out two narrow exceptions where pregnancy termination or loss information *can* be disclosed without individual authorization. The first is for defense in professional liability actions against the covered entity or business associate. The second is to investigate physical harm to the individual directly related to the pregnancy loss or termination, but only if the individual is unable to consent due to death or incapacity.
Section 2(b)
HITECH Act Revisions for Privacy and Security
This section mandates two revisions to HITECH Act regulations. First, it clarifies that refusing to fulfill a request to access, exchange, or use electronic health information (EHI) to comply with the new privacy prohibitions on pregnancy termination or loss information will *not* be considered "information blocking." Second, it requires health IT developers, as a condition of certification, to implement practices that allow for the segregation of pregnancy termination or loss data to ensure compliance with the new privacy rules.
Section 2(c)
Federal Preemption of Conflicting State Laws
This provision establishes that the Act preempts any state law that conflicts with or prevents the application of its privacy protections for pregnancy termination or loss information. However, it explicitly states that it does *not* preempt state laws that provide *greater* privacy protections. It also directs the Secretary to revise HIPAA preemption regulations (45 CFR 160.203) to ensure no other exceptions apply to this specific type of information, reinforcing the federal privacy floor.
Defines "pregnancy termination or loss information" broadly to include protected health information that could reveal having or seeking an abortion or care for pregnancy loss, encompassing requests for or receipt of items, services, education, counseling, or referrals related to abortion, miscarriage, stillbirth, and ectopic pregnancy.
Section 2(f)(2)
Why it matters:Standard legislative practice to place definitions at the end. However, the breadth of this definition is crucial for the bill's scope and impact.
Case for: Proponents argue this broad definition is necessary to ensure comprehensive privacy protection for all aspects of reproductive health care related to pregnancy termination or loss, preventing circumvention through narrow interpretations.
Case against: Opponents might argue the definition is overly broad, potentially encompassing information not directly related to an abortion or miscarriage but still falling under "care for pregnancy loss," which could lead to unintended consequences or difficulties in implementation for healthcare providers.
Estimated impact: Ensures that a wide range of sensitive health information related to reproductive health decisions is covered by the new privacy protections.