Judge McElroy Quashes DOJ Subpoena for Rhode Island Hospital Records, Rebuking Texas Tactic After 7 Court Losses
Updated
Updated · lawdork.com · May 13
Judge McElroy Quashes DOJ Subpoena for Rhode Island Hospital Records, Rebuking Texas Tactic After 7 Court Losses
2 articles · Updated · lawdork.com · May 13
Judge Mary S. McElroy on May 13 voided the DOJ’s administrative subpoena to Rhode Island Hospital and barred the department from seeking any documents under it.
Her ruling followed a hearing in which she said DOJ had shopped the case to Texas and, in the written order, said the department had misrepresented key facts under oath.
The subpoena had been enforced on April 30 by Judge Reed O’Connor in Texas without notifying the hospital; the Fifth Circuit then refused to stay that order hours before a compliance deadline.
DOJ’s setback comes after at least seven judges blocked similar patient-record demands tied to its effort to curb gender-affirming care for minors.
As those losses mounted, DOJ appears to have shifted to grand jury subpoenas from the Northern District of Texas, with NYU Langone disclosing one dated May 6 and received May 7.
A judge blocked the DOJ's 'fishing expedition.' What's next in the nationwide fight over private youth medical records?
With lawyers accused of 'dirty pool,' how can hospitals protect patient privacy from broad government demands for sensitive data?
Gender-Affirming Care Under Siege: DOJ Subpoenas, Judicial Resistance, and the Evolving Medical Landscape (2025–2026)
Overview
In May 2026, Federal Judge Mary S. McElroy quashed a broad subpoena from the U.S. Department of Justice that sought extensive medical records of minors receiving gender-affirming care at Rhode Island Hospital. This action was a direct response to an executive order signed by President Donald Trump in 2025, which ended federal support for such care and instructed the DOJ to prioritize related investigations. The judge’s decision highlighted growing concerns among privacy advocates and medical professionals about federal overreach, setting a strong precedent for protecting patient privacy against sweeping government demands.