n an attempt to bolster its defense of the unconstitutional Partial Birth Abortion Act of 2003, the Bush administration has gone beyond its campaign to destroy women's reproductive rights and has attacked the privacy rights of all Americans.

This assault is being conducted through subpoenas the Justice Department has issued demanding that at least six hospitals in New York City, Philadelphia, Illinois and elsewhere turn over hundreds of patient records for certain abortions. This egregious intrusion on patients' privacy is being pursued in the name of defending lawsuits against the abortion ban. Not only is the information not needed to do that, but it is also a flagrant example of why Congress and the attorney general have no business second-guessing sensitive medical decisions made by individuals and their doctors.

Judges in New York and Nebraska have barred the administration from enforcing the abortion law in response to suits brought by groups of doctors, who have argued, correctly, that the ban should be struck down because of imprecise wording and the lack of an exception to protect a woman's health. A narrow Supreme Court majority struck down a state ban in 2000 for omitting a health exception.

Attorney General John Ashcroft says the fishing expedition his department has started is justified to evaluate whether the procedures covered by the law are ever necessary to preserve a woman's health. In a sound ruling last week, a federal judge in Illinois rebuffed this flimsy argument. Citing state and federal law, as well as Supreme Court precedent, the judge, Charles Kocoras, also rejected the Ashcroft team's astonishing claim that no doctor-patient privilege exists under federal law protecting patients from public disclosure of their records.

Unfortunately, the federal judge in New York overseeing one of the legal challenges to the new law does not grasp his duty to protect patient privacy. That judge, Richard Conway Casey of New York's Southern District, has threatened to lift his injunction blocking enforcement of the abortion ban if leading hospitals in New York City and elsewhere fail to produce files on at least several dozen women's abortions.

Underscoring the legally dubious nature of Judge Casey's threat, the hospitals in question are not themselves parties to the lawsuit. Nor, for that matter, are the women whose personal privacy Mr. Ashcroft is so determined to invade. Moreover, as Judge Kocoras aptly noted, redacting a patient's name and identification number from her file neither ends the harm to individuals of having intimate details of their medical history publicly disclosed, nor adequately protects the patients' identities.

We applaud those hospitals that are resisting Mr. Ashcroft's privacy invasion, and encourage them to stand firm until the legal proceedings run their course. Meanwhile, Americans should see Mr. Ashcroft's intimidating tactics for the dangerous threat to liberty and privacy they really are.

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. (AP) -- Rush Limbaugh's attorneys accused prosecutors of breaking the law when they seized the conservative radio commentator's medical records in a search for evidence he illegally bought prescription painkillers.

The lawyers argued in court documents filed Tuesday that authorities should have first notified Limbaugh and given him a chance to challenge the seizure, rather than using search warrants to remove the records from his doctors' offices.

Limbaugh, his attorneys and the American Civil Liberties Union have argued the seizure violated his right to privacy and the confidentiality between patients and doctors. They want a state appeals court to rule that the records should remain under court seal.

Investigators seized the records in November as part of a probe into whether Limbaugh illegally went ``doctor shopping'' to obtain pain pills. The practice refers to visiting several doctors to receive duplicate prescriptions of controlled narcotics.

Limbaugh sought treatment for his addiction in October and has not been charged with a crime.

Prosecutors had no immediate comment Tuesday, but Palm Beach State Attorney Barry Krischer has repeatedly insisted that investigators have followed the law and ``scrupulously protected'' Limbaugh's rights.

The investigation is on hold until the appeals court rules.

Limbaugh told listeners to his afternoon radio show Tuesday that the investigation ``is all political, disguised as a legal case'' and that it was a ``search-and-destroy mission.''

He accused prosecutors of leaking details about the investigation to plant ``false stories in the press.''

``How many of you people think I was drug trafficking? How many of you people think I was laundering money? Pure leaks,'' Limbaugh said. ``And there's nothing to it.''

Prosecutors have drawn criticism for other actions in the case. Last month, the state Attorney General's office questioned the motives of Krischer and his staff after they released letters from Limbaugh attorney Roy Black about negotiating a guilty plea.

Krischer's office began investigating more than a year ago after Limbaugh's former maid told them she sold Limbaugh ``large quantities of hydrocodone, Oxycontin and other pharmaceutical drugs'' for years. She provided investigators with e-mails and answering machine recordings to support her claims