Utah Stands up to DEA in Support of Patient Privacy

Photo: Shutterstock

The state of Utah maintains a database of prescriptions dispensed by pharmacies—not all drugs, but a number of them. Called the Utah Controlled Substance Database (UCSD), it was formed in 1996 with the intent of using it to help doctors prevent overdoses and notice signs of abuse.

Law enforcement, however, has seen another use of the database, which they feel they can comb through in order to find people to hit with drug charges. Back in 2014 a detective did exactly this, searching the records of almost 500 fire-agency employees, without judicial oversight, and improperly charging at least two of them.

After that, the state changed the law that controls access to the UCSD; a search warrant is now required in order for law enforcement agencies to access it. That means that a neutral judge has to find that probable cause exists to allow local, state or federal law agencies access to specific information. Cops can’t just go fishing in the database for evidence.

The federal government seems to think it can, though. The DEA has issued administrative subpoenas, which are drafted by the department to get evidence, and do not require external approval by a judge, which Utah is refusing to honor. The state has decided that the DEA and other federal agencies also need search warrants in order to access the UCSD.

The DEA has responded by filing a lawsuit with the intention of forcing Utah to comply, which is why the American Civil Liberties Union has gotten involved in the issue.

The ACLU is representing several groups with a vested interest in preventing the DEA’s access to the database. By upholding the search warrant requirements for the federal government as well as state law enforcement, Utah will be taking great steps to protect the confidential medical information of its residents, which is an important aspect of privacy.

A great many things can be determined or assumed about a person based on their prescriptions, which can lead to negative consequences like job loss or criminal charges, whether they are legitimate or not. The state of Utah simply expects the government to have an actual crime in mind before they access the UCSD for such sensitive information.