WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

S 2522

Extends the authorization granted to the county of Franklin to impose an additional one percent of sales and compensating use taxes

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Dan Stec

Massachusetts bill strengthens privacy for reproductive and gender-affirming care by banning state/local cooperation with out-of-state probes and limiting data disclosure.

SUBSTITUTED BY A3424
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · S 2522

Summary — S.2522 (Massachusetts) — "An Act strengthening health care protections in the Commonwealth"

Status and key procedural notes
- Filed in the Massachusetts Senate (Senate Docket No. 2808 / Senate No. 2522) on 04/07/2025; petitioned and presented by Sen. Cindy F. Friedman (with multiple co‑petitioners listed).
- Advanced through committee stages and reported favorably; new draft/substitute was prepared (S2538). On 05/27/2025 the measure was SUBSTITUTED BY A3424 (House bill companion/substitute). For final statutory language, consult A3424 and later legislative actions.

Purpose / intent
- To strengthen privacy and legal protections for patients and providers involved in reproductive health care and gender‑affirming health care, by limiting state or local cooperation with out‑of‑state or other investigatory demands and by protecting certain provider and patient information from disclosure.

Major provisions (by subject area)
1. Public records / personal information (amendment to G.L. c.4, §7)
- Adds an exemption from public disclosure for the name, home address, personal email, telephone number, and other personal information of individuals “engaged in the provision, facilitation, or promotion of reproductive health care services or gender‑affirming health care services” (as defined in amended c.12 §11I½).

  1. Non‑cooperation with investigations (amendment to G.L. c.12, §11I½)

    • Prohibits state or local agencies, officers, employees, or agents acting under color of law from cooperating with, providing information to, or using resources in support of out‑of‑state, federal, or other agency investigations into “legally‑protected health care activity” when the services would be lawful if performed entirely in Massachusetts — except where federal law requires cooperation.
    • Bars admission of evidence of an individual’s involvement in legally‑protected health care activity as proof of wrongdoing in most proceedings; preserves a narrow exception allowing such evidence in tort/contract actions brought by the patient (or their legal representative).
    • Authorizes the Massachusetts Attorney General to seek injunctive or equitable relief to enforce these prohibitions.

  2. Data center protections (amendment to G.L. c.12C, §12)

    • The state data center is barred, except as required by federal law, from providing access to any data (including de‑identified data that could identify patients or providers) in response to out‑of‑state or federal inquiries into legally‑protected health care activity.

  3. Broader references and employee constraints

    • Changes in G.L. c.66 §10B broaden covered persons to include those “engaged in the provision, facilitation, or promotion” of reproductive/gender‑affirming care.
    • G.L. c.31 §75 is amended to clarify civil service employees cannot furnish information or cooperate with law enforcement in ways that conflict with the protections in c.12 §11I½ and related provisions.

  4. Electronic communications / subpoena compliance (new G.L. c.93, §115)

    • Prohibits Massachusetts‑operating providers of electronic communications or remote computing services from complying with out‑of‑state subpoenas, warrants, or similar legal process seeking records or assistance related to legally‑protected health care activity involving Massachusetts residents or providers — except where federal law requires compliance.
    • Defines key terms (e.g., “electronic communication,” “electronic communication services,” and “prohibited violation” referring to out‑of‑state laws that create civil/criminal liability for legally‑protected health care activity).
    • (Note: the published text is truncated; see substitute A3424 for full provision wording.)

Who would be affected
- Patients receiving reproductive or gender‑affirming health care, and providers, facilitators, clinics, and organizations involved in providing or supporting those services in Massachusetts.
- State and local agencies and employees (limitations on cooperation with external investigations).
- The Massachusetts data center (c.12C) and electronic communications/remote computing service providers that operate in Massachusetts.
- Law enforcement and prosecutorial authorities in other jurisdictions seeking information or assistance.

Potential impacts and considerations
- Strengthens in‑state privacy and legal protections for reproductive and gender‑affirming care; intended to insulate Massachusetts providers, patients, and data from out‑of‑state enforcement attempts.
- Could create conflicts where federal statutes or valid federal warrants require disclosure or cooperation; the bill repeatedly carves out compliance “as required by federal law.”
- Likely to generate litigation over scope, especially in cases where out‑of‑state subpoenas intersect with federal process or interstate investigative cooperation.
- Because the text shown was substituted by A3424, the final operative rules may differ; stakeholders should review the substitute bill and any enacted version for precise legal effect.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.