NEW YORK — A federal judge on Wednesday put a halt to efforts by federal prosecutors based in Texas to obtain the private medical records of transgender patients who received treatment at New York hospitals, declaring the move part of an unconstitutional government campaign to “demonize and eradicate an entire population of transgender” people.
Judge Katherine Polk Failla issued her ruling just one day after hearing arguments in Manhattan. She described the government’s attempt to access the most sensitive health records of a “uniquely vulnerable group” of patients — records spanning a six-year period — as “most egregious” and a violation of the Constitution.
The judge accused the Justice Department of turning to criminal investigations as a workaround to obtain private records related to transgender medical care, after courts around the country had repeatedly refused similar requests made through civil channels.
Federal prosecutors had sought the records as part of a criminal investigation into the possible “misbranding” of drugs that had been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
A request for comment from the Justice Department was not immediately answered.
Omar Gonzalez-Pagan, an attorney representing the plaintiffs, described the ruling as “a victory for the basic privacy of our clients and all families like theirs across New York City.” In a written statement, he said using subpoenas to obtain the identities and sensitive health information of transgender young people “should send chills down the spine of every American.”
Judge Failla’s ruling came in response to a lawsuit filed this month on behalf of minors, their parents, and young adults who had received what the lawsuit described as medically necessary gender-affirming care in New York City.
Court documents indicate that NYU Langone Hospitals was among several medical institutions that received a federal grand jury subpoena on May 7, issued by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Texas. The records request originated from a special agent with the Kansas City office of criminal investigation within the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
Judge Failla noted that at least 40 individuals who were treated at NYU Langone alone fell within the subpoena’s scope, which covered the period from January 1, 2020, through May 5, 2026.
Most major medical organizations maintain that access to gender-affirming care is essential for individuals diagnosed with gender dysphoria. Transgender teens, their parents, and healthcare providers have described such treatment as life-saving for young people who experience depression or suicidal thoughts because their gender identity does not align with the gender they were assigned at birth.
Gender-affirming care can take many forms, including counseling, puberty-blocking medications, hormone therapy, or — in rare cases involving minors — surgery.
Twenty-seven states have placed restrictions on or outright banned gender-affirming care for minors. In June 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that states have the constitutional authority to do so.
President Donald Trump has made rolling back transgender rights a priority of his administration. During his second term, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has moved to use regulatory authority to restrict gender-affirming care for minors, while the Justice Department has pushed hospitals — many of which depend on federal funding — to hand over private patient records.
At the start of her ruling, which she read aloud during an electronic court proceeding, Judge Failla noted that the “current administration” had issued directives in its opening days that “sought to demonize and eradicate an entire population of transgender individuals.”
By the time she concluded — nearly an hour later — Failla had granted class-action status to the plaintiffs and found that the Justice Department’s use of subpoenas violated both the Fourth and Fifth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. She also scheduled a July 8 hearing to consider additional evidence before deciding whether to issue a longer-lasting preliminary injunction, which would be the next legal step following Wednesday’s temporary restraining order.
