Whalen v. Roe, 429 U.S. 589 (1977)
Whalen v. Roe is a foundational case in the constitutional law of privacy, particularly the subset often called informational privacy.
Does New York's requirement that physicians and pharmacists report to the state the names and addresses of patients receiving prescriptions for certain controlled substances, for storage in a secure centralized database, violate a constitutionally protected right to privacy under the Fourteenth Amendment?
The Due Process Clause protects privacy interests that include (1) an individual's interest in independence in making certain kinds of important personal decisions (decisional autonomy) and (2) an individual's interest in avoiding disclosure of highly personal matters (confidentiality). Government collection of personal information does not violate due process where it serves a legitimate and substantial state interest and is accompanied by adequate safeguards against unwarranted public disclosure and misuse; absent a fundamental right, such regulations are judged under a deferential standard and are upheld if reasonable relative to their purposes.
No. New York's program, which collects and stores patient-identifying information about Schedule II prescriptions with specific security measures and restricted access, does not violate a constitutionally protected right to privacy.
Whalen is a cornerstone in informational privacy jurisprudence. It articulates the two-strand privacy framework that courts and scholars still use and establishes that government collection of personal data can be constitutional when justified by legitimate objectives and protected by meaningful safeguards. The decision has influenced later cases, including NASA v. Nelson, where the Court again acknowledged—without definitively defining—the constitutional interest in informational privacy while upholding secure government data practices. For law students, Whalen provides a model of balancing private confidentiality interests against administrative efficacy and public-health needs, and it anticipates modern controversies over electronic health records, prescription monitoring programs, and broader data governance.