FTC issued Civil Investigative Demands to Endocrine Society and AAP for records on pediatric gender-affirming care guidelines

On January 15, 2026, the Federal Trade Commission issued Civil Investigative Demands (CIDs) to two major medical professional societies — the Endocrine Society and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) — demanding extensive internal records related to their clinical practice guidelines on pediatric gender dysphoria. The FTC issued the demands under Section 20 of the FTC Act, framing the investigation around whether the organizations had made "false or unsubstantiated representations or engaged in unfair practices in connection with the marketing and advertising of" pediatric gender dysphoria treatments for minors. The CIDs demanded records dating back to January 1, 2014, including membership information, educational materials, conference records, financial statements, pharmaceutical relationships, development records for the organizations' clinical practice guidelines, and legislative testimony.

The medical societies argued the CIDs were retaliatory, unconstitutional, and well outside the FTC's consumer-protection statutory authority. The Endocrine Society filed suit in federal court on February 17, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (case 1:26-cv-00512), arguing the investigation constituted First Amendment viewpoint-based retaliation targeting their 2017 clinical practice guidelines on gender dysphoria. The AAP likewise challenged its CID through both the FTC's internal administrative process and federal court. State attorneys general filed amicus briefs supporting the medical organizations' constitutional arguments.

On April 7, 2026, Chief Judge James E. Boasberg held a hearing on the Endocrine Society's motion for a preliminary injunction without ruling from the bench. The DOJ argued that challenges to the CIDs' scope must proceed through the FTC's own administrative process rather than federal court, but the court rejected this jurisdictional argument, finding that First Amendment retaliation claims against an ongoing investigation produce "existing and continuing" harms sufficient to confer jurisdiction.

Updates

2026-05-08 — Boasberg grants preliminary injunction, cites extensive evidence of animus [2]

Chief Judge Boasberg granted a preliminary injunction on May 8, 2026, blocking FTC enforcement of the CIDs against the Endocrine Society. The court found "extensive evidence of animus" and concluded the Trump administration offered "wafer-thin justifications lacking evidentiary support" for the investigations. The court determined the FTC had demonstrated "viewpoint-based animus" toward organizations supporting gender-affirming care, targeting academic and medical speech rather than genuine commercial activity within the FTC's consumer-protection mandate. A parallel preliminary injunction was also issued blocking a related FTC probe into the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH). The preliminary injunctions allow the lawsuits to proceed while barring FTC enforcement of the investigative demands.