Preemption Analysis of Texas Laws Relating to the Privacy of Health ...

Texas Rules of Evidence
Rule
Related/Contrary
Explanation
Article IV: Relevancy and Its Limits
Preemption
Exception
Is State Law
Preempted?
Recommendation
402
Relevant Evidence
Generally
Admissible;
Irrelevant Evidence
Inadmissible
Not Related
(1) To the extent the relevant information includes
PHI, the rule does not require a covered entity to
disclose information, but only limits the evidence that
can be admitted to what is relevant.
(2) Furthermore, the rule contains the proviso,
"except as otherwise provided by . . . statute . . . or
by other rules prescribed pursuant to statutory
authority." Thus, if not permitted under HIPAA, the
information is not admissible even if relevant.
No
(3) HIPAA permits a covered entity to disclose PHI
in the course of a judicial or administrative
proceeding in response to a court order. 45 C.F.R. §
164.512(e)(1)(i).
412
Evidence of
Previous Sexual
Conduct in Criminal
Cases
Related/Not Contrary
The information at issue is not PHI.
No
Article V: Privileges
509
Physician-Patient
Privilege
Related/Not Contrary
This rule does not require a physician (a covered
entity) to disclose PHI. Nor does it prescribe the
circumstances under which a physician may or must
disclose PHI.
With regard to both civil and criminal proceedings,
HIPAA permits a covered entity to disclose PHI in
the course of a judicial or administrative proceeding
in response to a court order. 45 C.F.R. §
164.512(e)(1)(i).
No
463