The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated...
HIPPA, privacy laws, and the policy the hospital had worked out with the police dept. are (mostly) derived from the 4th. It need not be explained: Any damn fool who's run into these issues, or ever signed off on paperwork prior to any medical service from a new (to the patient) provider would be aware of the issues. (Ok, that assumes said damn fool was enough of a non fool to read what they signed.) You substitute "medical records" in your argument, but that is just being obtuse. (Kirk's "Finnegan") The issue is "medical or health information", which is NOT necessarily medical records, and is legally required to be tightly guarded & protected, as is consent for any medical procedure.
Again, I am telling you, don't accept this from me, just ask any medical professional.
Oh, wait. Some have already commented on this thread.
Yes, fair enough, but again, HIPPA was mentioned no where in any article I read.
It is also fifth in terms of giving consent to draw blood if it could be used as evidence against in a criminal case.
On a broader note, my interest isn’t which side was “right”. That’s debatable and for a court to decide.
My problem has always been with her resisting arrest and people supporting such lawless and uncivilized action as if they were BLM.