City Council passed the Health Data Protection Ordinance at its Monday night meeting, barring the City of Evanston from providing sensitive health data to federal or out-of-state governments unless compelled to do so by a lawfully issued judicial warrant.
The measure, which was unanimously introduced at the council’s June 9 iteration and approved without discussion Monday, seeks to further protect abortion access and allow people to make “autonomous decisions” about “the expression of gender identity through one’s own body,” both of which are already protected under Illinois state law.
“It’s great for us to have laws and ordinances that say to individuals seeking those forms of care: ‘Hey it’s legal for you to come here,’” Mayor Daniel Biss said at a press conference ahead of the council meeting. “But the next step we have to take is that ‘we’re going to protect you in case somebody in your home state, home county chooses to try to weaponize us against you to enforce their unjust laws.’”
Despite Biss’ insistence of the ordinance’s importance, some legal scholars argue that, in practice, the move does not carry much weight.
“This is clearly performative politics,” said Pritzker Prof. Nadav Shoked, who specializes in local government law and the theory of property.
Shoked saw the legislation as directly tied to Biss’ congressional campaign, adding that it could take attention away from issues like affordable housing and education, which he said a municipal government may have a greater ability to affect.
At the press conference, held a few hours before the council meeting, Biss noted that plans for codifying health data protection began in January — four months before he announced his bid to represent Illinois’ 9th Congressional District in Washington — when the city passed its Welcoming City Ordinance of similar nature.
Shoked conceded that while there could be scenarios in which the ordinance would come into play, they are likely few and far between.
“What does it mean to be an abortion sanctuary city in a state that allows abortion?” Shoked asked rhetorically. “Let me help you with that. It means nothing.”
Ahead of the council’s Monday vote, Sergeant Tom Giese of the Evanston Police Department answered questions from the council about a contract with Flock Safety, a third-party surveillance technology company that was recently involved in audits of Illinois license plate data in abortion and immigration-related cases.
Giese said that Flock “did not find a single credible case of law enforcement using the system to locate vulnerable women seeking health care in Illinois.”
Thomas Skuzinski, a professor in Northern Illinois University’s School of Public and Global Affairs, agreed that, legally speaking, “there’s no reason to think (the ordinance) would be a big deal.”
“People probably want to make a big deal out of it because of the words that are in it,” he said. “It’s a hot-button issue.”
But for some, like Ald. Jonathan Nieuwsma (4th), protecting health data felt more personal than a municipal government’s response to federal policy shifts.
Nieuwsma pointed to his role as a father, referencing his own daughter as he discussed the measure ahead of its passing.
“One of the things that’s going to be on my mind as a parent is: ‘Where do I want to send my daughter to college?’” Nieuwsma asked in the press conference. “If she can’t get the health care she might need as a college student, I might not want her to go to college in that particular state.”
Email: [email protected]
Related Stories:
— Evanston joins local governments in legal fights over federal funding, immigration
— Devoid of debate, sleepy City Council meeting yields contract shifts, labor regulations
