On Wednesday, a judge in New York temporarily blocked federal prosecutors in Texas from accessing the medical records of transgender patients treated at New York hospitals. Judge Katherine Polk Failla described this government action as part of an improper effort to "demonize and eradicate an entire population of transgender" individuals. She deemed the pursuit of sensitive medical records pertaining to a "uniquely vulnerable group" of patients over a six-year period as "most egregious" and unconstitutional.
Failla's decision came after oral arguments were presented in Manhattan. The judge criticized the Justice Department for resorting to criminal investigations to obtain private health records after facing repeated rejections for similar requests via civil means across the country. The records in question were sought as part of a probe into potential "misbranding" of drugs that had been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
Omar Gonzalez-Pagan, representing the plaintiffs, hailed the ruling as "a victory for the basic privacy of our clients and all families like theirs across New York City." He further stated that the use of subpoenas to gain access to the identities and sensitive health information of transgender youth "should send chills down the spine of every American."
This ruling stemmed from a lawsuit filed on behalf of minors, their parents, and young adults who received medically necessary gender-affirming care in New York City. According to the lawsuit, NYU Langone Hospitals was among several institutions that received a federal grand jury subpoena from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of Texas on May 7. The records request came from a special agent associated with the FDA’s Kansas City criminal investigation office.
Judge Failla indicated that over 40 individuals at NYU Langone alone had received treatment during the subpoena's designated period from January 1, 2020, to May 5, 2026. This situation highlights the ongoing contentious debate surrounding gender-affirming care, which major medical groups assert is crucial for people suffering from gender dysphoria. Transgender teens, alongside their parents and healthcare providers, have described such care as potentially life-saving for children grappling with depression or suicidal thoughts due to a disconnect between their gender identity and the sex assigned to them at birth.
Gender-affirming care can encompass various forms, including counseling, puberty blockers, hormone therapy, and in rare cases, surgeries for minors. Notably, 27 states have enacted limitations or outright bans on gender-affirming care for minors. Furthermore, the U.S. Supreme Court confirmed in June 2025 that states have the constitutional authority to implement such restrictions.
During his administration, former President Donald Trump was reported to have aggressively pursued the rollback of transgender rights. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, under Trump's leadership, attempted to use its regulatory powers to obstruct gender-affirming care for minors. The Justice Department also sought to access private medical records from providers, creating additional pressures on hospitals reliant on federal funding.
At the beginning of her lengthy ruling, Judge Failla mentioned that the "current administration" had enacted orders almost immediately upon taking office, which aimed to "demonize and eradicate" transgender individuals. By the end of her nearly hour-long statement, she had granted class-action status to the plaintiffs and asserted that the Justice Department violated the Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the Constitution with its subpoenas. A hearing for further evidence is scheduled for July 8, at which time she will decide on imposing a preliminary injunction following her temporary restraining order issued on Wednesday.
