A federal judge in Rhode Island has quashed a U.S. Justice Department administrative subpoena that sought identifying information and medical records for minors who received gender-affirming care at Rhode Island Hospital. The ruling criticized DOJ lawyers’ handling of the case and highlighted the government’s effort to pursue enforcement in a Texas federal court.
A U.S. District Court judge in Rhode Island has blocked the Justice Department from obtaining sensitive patient information from Rhode Island Hospital as part of a federal investigation into gender-affirming care for minors.
In a written ruling issued Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Mary S. McElroy granted emergency motions to quash the department’s administrative subpoena. The subpoena sought extensive data tied to minor patients, including dates of birth, Social Security numbers and addresses, along with medical records related to gender-affirming care provided over multiple years, according to the subpoena language and the court’s description of it. (apnews.com)
McElroy sharply faulted the Justice Department’s conduct in the dispute, writing that DOJ attorneys had “misrepresented and withheld information” during the litigation and raising concerns about the government’s credibility in seeking such records. (apnews.com)
The decision also focused on where the government chose to litigate. McElroy said the department pursued enforcement proceedings in the Northern District of Texas rather than in Rhode Island—an approach she described as an effort to avoid scrutiny by turning to a distant forum. (beckershospitalreview.com)
The ruling came amid a broader pattern of court fights over similar federal subpoenas. The Associated Press reported that at least seven other federal courts have agreed to quash or narrow comparable subpoenas the Justice Department sent to providers nationwide. (apnews.com)
The Rhode Island case has proceeded alongside related litigation in Texas. Court accounts and coverage of the dispute describe the Rhode Island order as effectively nullifying an earlier Texas enforcement order the DOJ obtained from U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor, though further appeals and jurisdictional questions may determine how the conflicting rulings are resolved. (apnews.com)
