Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The act protects "work products" and "documentary materials," which have been broadly interpreted. [1] A subpoena must be ordered by the court to gain access to the information. The act stemmed in part from Zurcher v. Stanford Daily. [1]
The U.S. Department of Justice undertook a comprehensive evaluation of their practices and policies regarding issuing subpoenas, search warrants and court orders to obtain records or information from journalists, meeting with stakeholders in the news media, First Amendment advocates, and members of the Congress.
The First Amendment states the government cannot violate the individual's right to " freedom of speech, or of the press". [3] In the past, this amendment primarily served as a legal justification for infringement on an individual's right to privacy; as a result, the government was unable to clearly outline a protective scope of the right to speech versus the right to privacy.
Wade (1973), the Supreme Court invoked a "right to privacy" as creating a right to an abortion, sparking a lasting nationwide debate on the meaning of the term "right to privacy". In Lawrence v. Texas (2003), the Supreme Court invoked the right to privacy regarding the sexual practices of same-sex couples.
The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act — otherwise known as HIPAA — has become a major topic of discussion amid the rollout of COVID-19 vaccines.
A subpoena duces tecum (pronounced in English / s ə ˈ p iː n ə ˌ dj uː s iː z ˈ t iː k ə m / sə-PEE-nə DEW-seez TEE-kəm), or subpoena for production of evidence, is a court summons ordering the recipient to appear before the court and produce documents or other tangible evidence for use at a hearing or trial. In some jurisdictions ...
Information from or copies of records may be released only to authorized individuals, and the hospital shall ensure that unauthorized individuals cannot gain access to or alter patient records. Original medical records shall be released by the hospital only in accordance with federal or state laws, court orders, or subpoenas. (4) Content of record.
United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27 (2000), was a United States Supreme Court case involving Webster Hubbell, who had been indicted on various tax-related charges, and mail and wire fraud charges, based on documents that the government had subpoenaed from him. [1]