DOJ issues criminal subpoena to NYU Langone Health for private trans youth medical records

The U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of Texas — acting as part of a coordinated, multi-state Justice Department campaign — issued a criminal subpoena to NYU Langone Health demanding private medical records of transgender minors. The subpoena reached back to 2020 and sought patient names, provider identities, and details about how NYU Langone codes gender-affirming procedures in its billing and record-keeping systems. The demand was issued under criminal (grand jury) authority rather than civil process, a choice advocates characterized as deliberately coercive: it carries the threat of contempt and criminal liability, compared to the lower stakes and easier legal challenges available for civil administrative subpoenas.

The subpoena was received despite federal medical privacy law. HIPAA generally bars the disclosure of patient health information without patient consent, and courts in multiple jurisdictions had already blocked identical DOJ subpoenas before this one was issued. By early June 2026, federal courts in Rhode Island, Maryland, and California had quashed similar demands, with the Rhode Island court finding the subpoena "issued in bad faith for an improper purpose." Advocates and affected families argued the New York subpoena was part of the same campaign, intended not to investigate any specific crime but to expose providers and patients to government surveillance, and to pressure hospitals into curtailing transgender care.

Three transgender minors and two transgender adults (who were minors when they received care) filed suit in federal court to block disclosure of their records. The ACLU, NYCLU, and Lambda Legal represented the plaintiffs. On June 13, 2026, New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani's Law Department filed an amicus brief supporting the motion to block, arguing that the DOJ's demand violated patient privacy rights and exceeded lawful investigative authority. The DOJ contended that a New York court lacked jurisdiction to block a Texas grand-jury subpoena. The event date is approximate; the exact date the subpoena was issued is not publicly available, but it is known to predate the June 2, 2026 lawsuit filing.

Updates

2026-06-24 — Federal judge granted classwide TRO blocking DOJ records demand [3, 4, 5]

On June 24, 2026, U.S. District Judge Katherine Polk Failla of the Southern District of New York granted the plaintiffs' motion for a temporary restraining order and provisional class certification in Coe v. Blanche, No. 1:26-cv-04641 (ECF No. 65), barring the Justice Department, its officers, and agents from seeking or obtaining the subpoenaed patient records. Announcing the ruling from the bench, Judge Failla said the government's demand "shocks the conscience" by seeking "the most personal and sensitive information a medical provider could hold" without "any legitimate government interest" justifying the disclosure sought. It was the first ruling to block the department's escalated effort to obtain transgender minors' medical records through grand jury subpoenas, following earlier rulings against its administrative subpoenas.

2026-07 — Judge converted the TRO into a preliminary injunction [6]

Judge Failla ordered a preliminary injunction continuing the block on the DOJ's subpoenas, after finding the plaintiffs are likely to suffer irreparable harm without the court's action and are likely to prevail on their claims against NYU Langone under New York confidentiality law. The Justice Department filed a notice of appeal to the Second Circuit.

2026-08-26 — Second Circuit denied DOJ's bid to stay the injunction [6]

A Second Circuit panel — Trump appointees Richard J. Sullivan and William J. Nardini, and Biden appointee Alison J. Nathan — denied the Justice Department's motion to stay Judge Failla's preliminary injunction, offering little explanation beyond "upon due consideration, it is hereby ordered that the motion is denied." The ruling leaves the injunction blocking the subpoenas in place pending the underlying appeal.