Sixth Circuit Upholds Constitutionality of Michigan’s Lifesaving Newborn Screening Program

LANSING – Yesterday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued a decision (PDF) affirming the constitutionality of Michigan’s lifesaving Newborn Screening Program and the BioTrust for Health, announced Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel. The decision reversed a lower court’s ruling that had found the programs violated the Constitutional rights of the children and their parents to direct their children’s medical care. 

The Newborn Screening Program, operated by the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services (MDHHS), collects blood samples from newborn babies and screens them for diseases, which helps save infant lives through early detection. Newborn screening looks for more than 50 disorders that can affect blood cells, brain development, how the body breaks down nutrients from food, lungs and breathing, hormones and how the body fights infection. This includes congenital hyperthyroidism, sickle cell disease and cystic fibrosis. The BioTrust for Health facilitates third-party health research using de-identified data or blood spots collected by the Newborn Screening Program. 

“The Newborn Screening Program saves lives,” Nessel said. “I want to thank the Court for its decision and the dedicated attorneys in my office who litigated this case for years to ensure Michigan can continue early detection of serious diseases while also advancing medical research through privacy-protected de-identified data.” 

“With this ruling, MDHHS can continue to fulfill its commitment to protect the health and well-being of Michigan families, particularly its youngest and most vulnerable residents,” said Elizabeth Hertel, MDHHS director. “Michigan’s newborn screening program is designed to quickly diagnose babies who may look healthy but have rare and often serious disorders that require early treatment. Since 1965, this program has ensured thousands of families were quickly provided information about their baby’s condition, allowing for early interventions and healthier outcomes.” 

The Sixth Circuit reaffirmed that the programs’ post-screening practices, including analyzing de-identified blood spots for quality improvement and making them available to vetted health researchers, does not violate constitutional protections. The decision also vacated a lower court’s injunction that had ordered the destruction of stored blood spots and associated data.