A Recent Minnesota Order Regarding the Sharing of Covid-19 Patient Information May Have Significant Legal Considerations. The Covid-19, AKA “Corona Virus”, and Current Considerations by Government The pandemic covid-19 crisis has led to unprecedented considerations and speculations on what the future of our medical data and privacy will look like both in Minnesota and throughout the United States. Federal officials have even considered the possibility of issuing certified “immunity cards” to people who have had the corona virus despite the fact we have no idea whether inherent immunity invests after infection and for how long. Obviously government has taken unprecedented actions in the face of this new and fast moving public safety concern. The contrast between our deepest held liberties and the government restrictions on our very movements and livelihoods present significant legal questions with facts that appear virtually nowhere in published court opinions. In short, we are in unchartered territory, and while we must continue to operate on science and facts, protect our neighbors, and avoid mindless conspiracy theories, liberty is a thing that must be closely guarded, and history teaches us that liberty is most vulnerable in the face of fear and crisis. That means, for those of us in the legal profession, especially criminal defense attorneys, we need to remain vigilant, thoughtful, and deliberative when studying these developments as they have at least the potential to violate certain rights. The criminal defense lawyer should have an updated and watchful eye on civil liberties in the context of the Covid-19 Pandemic and the operation of law enforcement and courts. It was recently revealed that, according to an executive order of Governor Tim Walz, the Minnesota Department of Health has the street addresses and other information of every person known to be infected with Covid-19, and that information can be freely shared with law enforcement. While there may be utility to such an order, Minnesota medical privacy laws carry significant privileges for patients of all sorts which far exceed even HIPPA standards. Recently, Alex DeMarco achieved a victory in a DWI case where a blood sample was suppressed after a serious accident in which his client was alleged to be driving under the influence. The following is some pertinent law on the subject of how your medical information can be shared. Minnesota Statute § 595.02, subd. 1 … (d) A licensed physician or surgeon, dentist, or chiropractor shall not, without the consent of the patient, be allowed to disclose any information or any opinion based thereon which the professional acquired in attending the patient in a professional capacity, and which was necessary to enable the professional to act in that capacity; after the decease of the patient, in an action to recover insurance benefits, where the insurance has been in existence two years or more, the beneficiaries shall be deemed to be the personal representatives of the deceased person for the purpose of waiving this privilege, and no oral or written waiver of the privilege shall have any binding… Read more {+}