Man Convicted for Unauthorized Access to Hospital Records of Justice Ginsburg

A hospital patient search screen showing Justice Ginsburg’s name and details of ten visits, including radiology, oncology, and surgery services, was leaked and circulated on social media. Prior to appearing on Twitter, the screenshot was posted on an anonymous message board where users discussed conspiracy theories about Justice Ginsburg’s health.

" They found that a non-hospital device using a specific employee’s credentials conducted searches for "Gins," "Barker," and "Ginston" on January 7, 2019.

" Following the investigation, the hospital deactivated the employee’s account, notified his employer, and provided his name and a coworker’s to law enforcement. Federal agents interviewed the employee at his workplace, with his company’s CEO present during the interview.

The employee confirmed ownership of the credentials and admitted to searching for "Barker" but denied conducting the "Gins" and "Ginston" searches.

He suggested alternative explanations, including accidental keyboard input by a cat or use by a coworker. The employee was prosecuted and convicted of destroying and altering records and obtaining individually identifiable health information without authorization. He was acquitted of disclosing such information.

The court found sufficient evidence to uphold the conviction under federal law prohibiting unauthorized access to identifiable health information maintained by covered entities such as hospitals. The court rejected the defense argument that the leaked screenshot did not qualify as individually identifiable health information because it did not disclose specific medical conditions or physician names.

The screenshot identified the patient by name, showed treatment dates and locations, and listed medical services received, which the court determined fell within the scope of protected health information.

The court also ruled that the presence of the company CEO during the interview did not render the employee’s statements involuntary. The interview was conducted voluntarily, without coercion or threats, and the employee was informed of his rights throughout. The employee was sentenced to two years in prison for the offenses related to unauthorized access and alteration of hospital records.