> This doesn't say that the federal rules of evidence recognize doctor-patient privilege, and, in fact, the same site says explicitly that it doesn't. With all

> This doesn't say that the federal rules of evidence recognize doctor-patient privilege, and, in fact, the same site says explicitly that it doesn't. With all due respect, I disagree with your assertion that "the federal rules of evidence [doesn't] recognize doctor-patient privilege". SCOTUS's saying they > simply hold that this record [Whalen] does not establish an invasion of any right or liberty protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. [0] implies that there could be an invasion of a right protected by the Fourteenth Amendment, just not in this case. While you are strictly correct that this is not a representation of doctor-patient privilege, SCOTUS's assertion that Whalen does not violate the Fourteenth Amendment suggests the possibility that some distribution of medical data could violate the Fourteenth Amendment. As a side note, your assertion that the "same site says explicitly that it doesn't" recognize doctor-patient privilege is questionable. Would you mind pointing out which passage is explicit about this? [0] https://healthcare.uslegal.com/doctor-patient-confidentiality/constitutional-right-to-privacy/ https://healthcare.uslegal.com/doctor-patient-confidentialit...