Trump's DOJ Demanded Six Years of Children's Medical Records; Two Hospitals Settled to Protect Them

Select a Section to Explore

Chapter 1 — The Demand Reached Every Covered Patient

Chapter 2 — DOJ Changed Tactics; Judges Protected the Patients

Chapter 3 — Hospitals Settled and Committed to End Care

1 · The Demand Reached Every Covered Patient

1 · The Demand Reached Every Covered Patient — select a subtopic

1.1 — Trump Ordered the Campaign; DOJ Sought the Records

1.2 — Six Years of Clinical Histories and Family Authorizations

1 · The Demand Reached Every Covered Patient

1.1 · The Demand Reached Every Covered Patient

Trump Ordered the Campaign; DOJ Sought the Records

Trump ordered priority investigations into pediatric gender-transition care, subject to applicable law. His Justice Department demanded more than six years of identifying medical records, and two judges blocked disclosure after finding likely constitutional violations. NYU and Mount Sinai said they settled to protect patient privacy, and agreed to end the targeted care. Both New York hospitals had stopped their trans youth health programs earlier in 2026, before the settlements.

Read the full chapter — all the detail, fully footnoted →

Sources

[1]Grand jury subpoena to NYU Langone Hospitals, Northern District of Texas, dated May 6, 2026, return date June 10, 2026; Attachment A, definitions 4 and 9–12, requests 12–14

[2]Z.A. v. Blanche, No. 5:26-cv-04998-PCP, ECF 93 (N.D. Cal. July 2, 2026), P. Casey Pitts, J., 43 pp.

[3]Coe v. Blanche, No. 1:26-cv-04641-KPF, ECF 71 (S.D.N.Y. July 6, 2026), Katherine Polk Failla, J., pp. 2–5

[4]Coe v. Blanche, ECF 77, transcript of June 24, 2026 oral ruling, filed July 9, pp. 8, 11, 22-23, 25, 27, 29-30, 33

[5]NYU Langone Health, NYU Langone Statement on Settlement with DOJ (September 18, 2026)

[6]Giulia Heyward and Caroline Lewis, Mount Sinai reaches deal with Trump DOJ to end gender-affirming care for minors, Gothamist (September 4, 2026)

[7]DOJ, DOJ Secures Agreements with NYU and UPMC to End Pediatric Gender-Affirming Care (September 18, 2026)

[8]DOJ, Justice Department Secures Agreement with Mount Sinai to End Pediatric Gender-Affirming Care (September 4, 2026; updated September 8)

[9]Donald J. Trump, Executive Order 14187, January 28, 2025, sections 1, 8(c) and 11(b)

1.2 · The Demand Reached Every Covered Patient

Six Years of Clinical Histories and Family Authorizations

The NYU subpoena demanded the identity of every covered patient, their clinical history and parental authorizations, from January 1, 2020 through May 5, 2026. Stanford faced a similar demand, reaching records its lawyer said numbered in the tens of thousands. A parent told the court that disclosure would ruin the family's trust in the medical system.

Read the full chapter — all the detail, fully footnoted →

Sources

[1]Grand jury subpoena to NYU Langone Hospitals, Northern District of Texas, dated May 6, 2026, return date June 10, 2026; Attachment A, definitions 4 and 9–12, requests 12–14

[2]Z.A. v. Blanche, No. 5:26-cv-04998-PCP, ECF 93 (N.D. Cal. July 2, 2026), P. Casey Pitts, J., 43 pp.

2 · DOJ Changed Tactics; Judges Protected the Patients

2 · DOJ Changed Tactics; Judges Protected the Patients — select a subtopic

2.1 — A Texas Grand Jury After the Earlier Demands Failed

2.2 — The Government Has Investigative Power, and Won One Appeal

2 · DOJ Changed Tactics; Judges Protected the Patients

2.1 · DOJ Changed Tactics; Judges Protected the Patients

A Texas Grand Jury After the Earlier Demands Failed

Stanford had provided non-patient records and was preparing anonymized patient records when DOJ withdrew its administrative subpoena. DOJ served a nearly identical Texas grand jury demand the next day. Judge Pitts found that the switch aimed to avoid another loss in a forum DOJ considered friendlier; he protected Stanford patients, while denying statewide relief. In a preliminary ruling, New York Judge Failla found that targeting this vulnerable group shocked the conscience. Failla was also not satisfied that NYU could adequately anonymize the records to protect patients' privacy, given their volume and the identifying information throughout them.

Read the full chapter — all the detail, fully footnoted →

Sources

[2]Z.A. v. Blanche, No. 5:26-cv-04998-PCP, ECF 93 (N.D. Cal. July 2, 2026), P. Casey Pitts, J., 43 pp.

[3]Coe v. Blanche, No. 1:26-cv-04641-KPF, ECF 71 (S.D.N.Y. July 6, 2026), Katherine Polk Failla, J., pp. 2–5

[4]Coe v. Blanche, ECF 77, transcript of June 24, 2026 oral ruling, filed July 9, pp. 8, 11, 22-23, 25, 27, 29-30, 33

[10]Coe v. Blanche, ECF 65 (S.D.N.Y. June 24, 2026), temporary restraining order and provisional class certification, pp. 1-2

2.2 · DOJ Changed Tactics; Judges Protected the Patients

The Government Has Investigative Power, and Won One Appeal

DOJ argues that it can investigate drug-law violations and billing fraud, and that grand jury secrecy protects medical information. A divided Ninth Circuit agreed in a separate clinic case that Trump's policy opposition alone did not invalidate a subpoena. Paez argued in dissent that the record supported the lower court's finding that DOJ used the subpoena as a pretext to pressure providers to stop gender-affirming care. The court left privacy and scope objections for further proceedings; the Stanford judge found DOJ had not justified access to its patients' identifying records.

Read the full chapter — all the detail, fully footnoted →

Sources

[2]Z.A. v. Blanche, No. 5:26-cv-04998-PCP, ECF 93 (N.D. Cal. July 2, 2026), P. Casey Pitts, J., 43 pp.

[4]Coe v. Blanche, ECF 77, transcript of June 24, 2026 oral ruling, filed July 9, pp. 8, 11, 22-23, 25, 27, 29-30, 33

[7]DOJ, DOJ Secures Agreements with NYU and UPMC to End Pediatric Gender-Affirming Care (September 18, 2026)

[11]QueerDoc, PLLC v. DOJ, No. 25-7384 (9th Cir. August 14, 2026), Bea, J., joined by Bress, J.; Paez, J., dissenting; pp. 38–46, 52–56

[12]Z.A. v. Blanche, ECF 108 (N.D. Cal. July 31, 2026), order denying stay pending appeal, pp. 2–4

3 · Hospitals Settled and Committed to End Care

3 · Hospitals Settled and Committed to End Care — select a subtopic

3.1 — Patient Privacy Became a Reason to Settle

3.2 — The Records Were Protected; the Agreements Committed Hospitals to End Care

3.3 — The Charge as of October 10, 2026

3 · Hospitals Settled and Committed to End Care

3.1 · Hospitals Settled and Committed to End Care

Patient Privacy Became a Reason to Settle

Mount Sinai said it settled so it would not have to give the grand jury sensitive patient records. NYU also said its agreement removed that threat. NYU agreed to pay $8.5 million; Mount Sinai committed $2 million to free care plus an unspecified penalty. DOJ acknowledged that the settlements established no liability, and the hospitals denied wrongdoing.

Read the full chapter — all the detail, fully footnoted →

Sources

[5]NYU Langone Health, NYU Langone Statement on Settlement with DOJ (September 18, 2026)

[6]Giulia Heyward and Caroline Lewis, Mount Sinai reaches deal with Trump DOJ to end gender-affirming care for minors, Gothamist (September 4, 2026)

[7]DOJ, DOJ Secures Agreements with NYU and UPMC to End Pediatric Gender-Affirming Care (September 18, 2026)

[8]DOJ, Justice Department Secures Agreement with Mount Sinai to End Pediatric Gender-Affirming Care (September 4, 2026; updated September 8)

[13]WPATH v. FTC, No. 1:26-cv-00532-JEB, ECF 41 (D.D.C. May 7, 2026), James E. Boasberg, J., pp. 1, 5–10

3.2 · Hospitals Settled and Committed to End Care

The Records Were Protected; the Agreements Committed Hospitals to End Care

Both New York hospitals had stopped their trans youth health programs earlier in 2026, before the settlements. The September agreements secured their commitments to cease the targeted care. Mount Sinai patient Quincy May Cavanagh told Gothamist that estrogen treatment begun at 17 immediately improved her mood. Plaintiffs' counsel says no patient information was disclosed through the settlements.

Read the full chapter — all the detail, fully footnoted →

Sources

[4]Coe v. Blanche, ECF 77, transcript of June 24, 2026 oral ruling, filed July 9, pp. 8, 11, 22-23, 25, 27, 29-30, 33

[6]Giulia Heyward and Caroline Lewis, Mount Sinai reaches deal with Trump DOJ to end gender-affirming care for minors, Gothamist (September 4, 2026)

[7]DOJ, DOJ Secures Agreements with NYU and UPMC to End Pediatric Gender-Affirming Care (September 18, 2026)

[8]DOJ, Justice Department Secures Agreement with Mount Sinai to End Pediatric Gender-Affirming Care (September 4, 2026; updated September 8)

[9]Donald J. Trump, Executive Order 14187, January 28, 2025, sections 1, 8(c) and 11(b)

[14]Lambda Legal, ACLU and NYCLU, FAQ: Trump's Attempt to Seize Private Medical Records from New York Hospitals (captured October 11, 2026, including September settlement update)

[15]Giulia Heyward, NYU Langone strikes deal with Trump DOJ to end gender-affirming care for minors, Gothamist (September 18, 2026)

3.3 · Hospitals Settled and Committed to End Care

The Charge as of October 10, 2026

As of October 10, 2026, the New York records injunction remained in effect, and Stanford's case remained ongoing. The privacy findings were preliminary. The charge is abuse of investigative power: sweeping demands for children's confidential histories became pressure hospitals cited when agreeing to end care.

Read the full chapter — all the detail, fully footnoted →

Sources

[2]Z.A. v. Blanche, No. 5:26-cv-04998-PCP, ECF 93 (N.D. Cal. July 2, 2026), P. Casey Pitts, J., 43 pp.

[3]Coe v. Blanche, No. 1:26-cv-04641-KPF, ECF 71 (S.D.N.Y. July 6, 2026), Katherine Polk Failla, J., pp. 2–5

[5]NYU Langone Health, NYU Langone Statement on Settlement with DOJ (September 18, 2026)

[6]Giulia Heyward and Caroline Lewis, Mount Sinai reaches deal with Trump DOJ to end gender-affirming care for minors, Gothamist (September 4, 2026)

[7]DOJ, DOJ Secures Agreements with NYU and UPMC to End Pediatric Gender-Affirming Care (September 18, 2026)

[9]Donald J. Trump, Executive Order 14187, January 28, 2025, sections 1, 8(c) and 11(b)

[14]Lambda Legal, ACLU and NYCLU, FAQ: Trump's Attempt to Seize Private Medical Records from New York Hospitals (captured October 11, 2026, including September settlement update)

[16]Coe v. Blanche, No. 26-1886, Dkt. 53.1 (2d Cir. August 26, 2026), Sullivan, Nardini and Nathan, JJ.

[17]Coe v. Blanche, S.D.N.Y. district docket, page 2, through ECF 90 (August 26, 2026), captured October 11, 2026

[18]Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse, Z.A. v. Lucile Salter Packard Children's Hospital at Stanford, case 48409 (summary updated October 9; docket updated October 10, 2026)