A federal judge on Wednesday blocked Justice Department prosecutors from accessing the medical records of transgender individuals treated at New York City hospitals, issuing a temporary restraining order against the Trump administration.
U.S. District Judge Katherine Polk Failla, of the Southern District of New York, ruled in favor of plaintiffs seeking to shield sensitive patient information from federal investigators. The ruling bars the DOJ from seeking, receiving, using, retaining or disseminating any identifying or sensitive information pertaining to the plaintiffs while litigation proceeds.
The American Civil Liberties Union and aligned groups filed suit earlier this month against the subpoenas on behalf of three families with transgender youth and two transgender young adults who began care when they were minors. The case has since been expanded to a class-action lawsuit covering all individuals treated at New York City hospitals from January 2020 through May 5, 2026.
What the Right Is Saying
The Justice Department issued the subpoenas in May under authority of a federal grand jury sitting in Fort Worth, Texas, as part of an FDA probe into drugs used for gender-affirming care. The administration has defended its investigation as a legitimate exercise of federal law enforcement authority.
A DOJ spokesperson declined to comment on Failla's ruling. The department has not publicly outlined the specific targets or rationale behind the grand jury investigation.
Conservative legal advocates argue that federal prosecutors have broad authority to investigate potential violations of federal healthcare laws and that courts should be reluctant to second-guess grand jury subpoenas. Supporters of the administration's position contend that investigations into medical procedures involving minors warrant scrutiny regardless of the political sensitivities involved.
The administration has maintained it is enforcing existing law rather than targeting any particular group for discrimination.
What the Left Is Saying
Chase Strangio, co-director of the ACLU's LGBTQ and HIV Rights Project, said the group is "thankful" for Failla's ruling. In a release, Strangio criticized the administration's approach to the investigation.
"For the past year, the Trump administration has not only decided that it knows better than these families and their doctors what their medical needs are, but has also sought to obtain troves of sensitive information about patients in New York," Strangio said.
The ACLU argues that the subpoenas represent an overreach by federal authorities into private medical decisions made between patients, families, and healthcare providers. The organization has pledged to "continue to fight on behalf of these families and the fundamental liberty of all transgender New Yorkers and those who come here to seek needed medical care."
LGBTQ advocacy groups supporting the lawsuit say the investigation chills access to legitimate medical care and could discourage transgender individuals from seeking treatment out of fear their records will be targeted.
What the Numbers Show
At least 40 individuals were treated at NYU Langone hospitals alone during the period covered by the subpoenas, according to Judge Failla's court statements Wednesday as reported by the Associated Press.
The subpoenas sought records of patients who received medical treatment for gender dysphoria under the age of 18 from January 2020 through May 2026. The investigation spans approximately six years of patient data at major New York City hospital systems including NYU Langone and facilities within the Mount Sinai Health System.
Judge Failla, an appointee of former President Obama to the federal bench, found that the DOJ violated plaintiffs' Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures along with their rights to doctor-patient confidentiality under New York state law. She set a July 8 hearing date to hear additional evidence before deciding whether to impose a longer-lasting preliminary injunction.
The Bottom Line
The ruling temporarily shields thousands of patient records from federal investigators while litigation continues. If the temporary restraining order is converted to a preliminary injunction, it would represent a significant legal obstacle to the administration's ongoing FDA probe into gender-affirming care medications.
What happens next: Judge Failla's July 8 hearing will determine whether plaintiffs have demonstrated sufficient likelihood of success on the merits to warrant extended protection. The DOJ could appeal Wednesday's ruling or seek to narrow its scope. The underlying grand jury investigation in Texas remains active regardless of the New York court's blocking order, though prosecutors may face practical challenges accessing records from hospitals that are now prohibited from producing them.
Legal observers will be watching whether other federal courts faced with similar disputes take comparable approaches to shielding sensitive medical information, and whether the Supreme Court ultimately weighs in on the intersection of grand jury authority and constitutional protections for patient privacy.