27 Comments
User's avatar
Anne's avatar

Fight this to the death. It is just the beginning.

Rachel Goldstein's avatar

This is so infuriating and transparent. End goal is clear. Doesn’t seem to matter how they get there. My only ray of hope is that all the best advocacy groups are strategizing about how to fight this. 🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️

Rachel Goldstein's avatar

And… “sex-rejecting” makes my blood boil. Honestly. Repetition of a phrase doesn’t make it valid😤😤😤😡😡😡

Talia Perkins's avatar

"involved in rendering gender-affirming care or billing for it through insurance"

They will claim all payments processed over the internet are wire fraud. That's that angle.

Thank you, Baum.

Terri's avatar

If provided that list will find its way to the inbox of every attorney at AdF. They will then approach everyone on the list in search of just one dissatisfied individual. Then the case goes to court as proof of further bans and punishment. Yes, this is truly where we are.

Heather's avatar

I'm so worried for our beloved provider. And imagine the precedent this sets for all Americans. The president doesn't agree with your medical situation so he will go after you and anyone who provides your care. What's next - mental healthcare? Reproductive care? ADHD or other neurodivergence? Vaccinations? All of which have been under attack by MAGA and Trump.

Jenn C's avatar

Short answer, yes. Because eugenics.

Mike Gelt's avatar

In yet another attempt to target transgender youth, the DOJ has turned to the most conservative state in the country — Texas — because they know this abuse of power would face far greater resistance elsewhere.

Using Texas courts and grand juries to issue subpoenas for private medical information concerning transgender youth and other specific information is nothing more than a politically motivated fishing expedition designed to create a bogus “report” aimed at discrediting gender-affirming care.

This is not legitimate science, and it is not about protecting children. It is about intimidation, harassment, and using the power of government to attack an already vulnerable community.

In my opinion, this effort violates the spirit of medical privacy protections and directly challenges shield laws enacted by states like New York to protect access to gender-affirming care.

States that claim to support civil rights and medical freedom must not cave to this pressure.

Governors and Attorneys General in New York, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and every other state with shield protections must fight this abuse of authority aggressively and publicly.

Medical decisions belong between patients, families, and doctors — not politicians looking for headlines or ideological revenge.

This abuse must not be tolerated and the information demanded must not be provided

Elizabeth F's avatar

The thought of this administration trying so hard to get the names of trans kids makes my skin crawl

William Flug's avatar

Nazi thugs in ten-gallon hats using "the legal system" for blatantly illegal activity. N.b. a Federal Judge in RI quashed a similar subpoena. Lawyer up, NYU-Langone.

Carin Oliver's avatar

“Sex-rejecting” sounds like someone who is saying NO to unwanted sexual advances.

John Janelle Backman's avatar

"2. In addition to the names of providers, the DOJ wants the names and medical histories of every trans youth patient who received gender-affirming care from Langone since 2020. "

Oh. Hell. No.

Ken's avatar

What happened to HIPAA? That is still in effect, so legally, this medical info cannot be given out.

Ethan Emerson 🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️'s avatar

That doesn't apply to the federal government in this case, sadly.

Letters From a Trans-American's avatar

Outstanding reporting, S. Baum. Thank you for keeping us informed.

C Kipps's avatar

This is terrifying and any judge who gives this the thumbs up deserves to be disbarred.

Ken's avatar

How is there no mention of HIPAA in all of this subpoena paperwork. HIPAA is very strong and I would think it protects patient information from being given out to anyone, even the federal government.

Jenn C's avatar

But what happens when federal government doesn't give a fuck about the law? We're seeing that right now.

Ethan Emerson 🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️'s avatar

It's legal for the government to request records, HIPAA doesn't apply in this case, it's insane.

C Kipps's avatar

This is terrifying and any judge who gives this the thumbs up deserves to be disbarred.

Sarah F's avatar

Weird. Their definition of "sex rejecting procedure" only applies to minors. Even stranger, it could technically apply to any gender-affirming procedure, even for cisgender patients. These people are very devious, but sometimes they are not too bright.

Miranda Warren's avatar

I don't think they can ask for identification of attorneys the Company used. That would violate attorney-client privilege. I wonder what else in the subpoena can be quashed. The interesting thing for SCOTUS will be how to deal with the forum shopping, because there seems no way to carve out a trans (or queer) rule. What SCOTUS eventually decides to do about forum shopping will need to be applied on the federal level for all matters whether they be medicine, commerce, liberty, etc. Chief Justice Roberts is not a fan of judge shopping. Let us hope he is consistent and persuasive.

Ken's avatar

We already know Roberts is not consistent or he would not have eliminated the VRA in May right before an election.