/>iOn May 15, 2025, a district court in Illinois denied a motion by defendant Hospital Sisters Health System and Saint Francis (HSHS) to dismiss a class action claim brought against the hospital system under the Illinois Genetic Information Privacy Act (GIPA).
GIPA regulates the use, disclosure, and acquisition of genetic information and has adopted the same definition of genetic information as provided in the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA):
(i) the individual’s genetic tests; (ii) the genetic tests of family members of the individual; (iii) the manifestation of a disease or disorder in family members of such individual; or (iv) any request for, or receipt of, genetic services, or participation in clinical research which includes generic services, by the individual or any family member of the individual.
GIPA prohibits employers from soliciting or requesting genetic testing or genetic information of a person or their family members as a condition of employment. GIPA also prohibits employers from changing the terms, conditions, or privileges of employment or terminating the employment of any person due to a person or their family member’s genetic testing or information.
In this case, the plaintiff filed their complaint in December 2024, which states that the hospital system requires potential employees to submit a pre-employment medical examination that an HSHS employee conducts. This examination allegedly entails job applicants being required to disclose information concerning their family medical histories. The plaintiff alleges that she was a job applicant with HSHS and that she, too, was required to submit a medical examination that asked questions about her family’s medical history. These questions reportedly included inquiries on family history of heart disease, asthma, or psychological conditions in the plaintiff’s family.
In its motion to dismiss filed in February 2025, HSHS argued that the generic family medical history questions included in its medical examination are routine medical questions that do not constitute genetic information as protected by GIPA. The court was unconvinced, holding that “these questions involved[d] a clear report of the manifestation of a disease or disorder in a family which is clearly specified in GIPA through its adaptation of HIPAA’s definitions.” In addition, to support its holding, the court noted that the federal Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA), which is also incorporated into GIPA, defines the term “family medical history” as “information about the manifestation of disease or disorder” in family members.
Though GIPA litigation has not yet risen to the level of litigation regarding Illinois’ Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA), several courts in 2024 have noted that GIPA should apply broadly. In Taylor v. Union Pacific Railroad Co., No. 23-CV-16404, 2024 WL 3425751, (N.D. Ill. July 16, 2024), the court held that GIPA plaintiffs have lenient standing requirements, concluding that BIPA’s definition of “aggrieved persons” – which encompasses individuals who sustained no actual injury beyond a violation of their rights under the statute – applies to GIPA, as well. In McKnight v. United Airlines, Inc., No. 23-CV-16118, 2024 WL 3426807, at *1 (N.D. Ill. July 16, 2024), the court found that individuals outside of Illinois may nonetheless initiate GIPA litigation if the underlying activity “occurred primarily substantially in Illinois” and that GIPA has a five-year statute of limitations.
Employers with ties to Illinois should note that GIPA may apply to them. Any questions about a job applicant’s family medical history may be considered genetic information under the act—even if these questions are intended to be routine health inquiries—and could give rise to a GIPA claim. Pre-employment exams should be structured carefully to avoid running afoul of GIPA and potential class action risks.
