You may have heard: we got a subpoena from the Department of Justice (DOJ). So did 20 or so other organizations that provide gender affirming care. We don’t know the full list of who received subpoenas, but we know about some of them:
- Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP)
- University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC)
- University of Michigan
- Boston Children’s Hospital
- Children’s National Hospital
- Children’s Hospital Colorado
- Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles
- Seattle Children’s Hospital
The History
In June 2025, we received a subpoena from the DOJ demanding an extraordinary amount of data: our employment files, 5 years of patient records, any documents about how we bill or code for gender care, and any communications we had with pharmaceutical manufacturers about hormones or blockers for minor patients. The demands for patient records included names, birth dates, social security numbers, addresses, and parent/legal guardians names.
Gratefully, we were (and are) supported by a phenomenal legal team. They filed a motion to quash the subpoena, arguing that the subpoena was issued for an improper purpose and is overly broad. Put more simply, we argued that the DOJ issued the subpoena to intimidate us and to stop us from providing gender care, not actually for a proper investigation of our actions.
On October 27,2025, Judge Whitehead of the District Court for the Western District of Washington agreed with us and granted our motion to quash the subpoena. (Quash = ban hammer! 🔨💥)
Several other judges around the country who have heard similar cases have also ruled that the subpoenas were overly broad, improper, and/or meant to stop providers from offering gender care.
Because the judge agreed that the subpoena was issued for an improper purpose, we have not had to provide the DOJ with any of the requested information to date!
While this legal journey has been time consuming and taxing, we are still providing medically-necessary, evidence-based, life-saving, gender affirming care.
The Arguments
We believe that the government’s goal is to make gender care illegal (they’ve said so!) We also find the amount of data the government demanded access to via the subpoena very concerning: we cannot determine a legitimate reason why the government would need identifying information on every person to whom we have prescribed hormones or blockers. We believe that the DOJ’s true goal is as they stated: the elimination of trans health care.
From our motion to quash:
![screenshot of QueerDoc's motion to quash the DOJ subpoena:[sentence fragment] Yet, as the White House itself has explained, when the President directed FDCA investigations targeting providers of gender affirming care, 90 Fed. Reg. at 8772-73, the "intended effect" of that directive was not to investigate potentially misleading claims about durgs used in gender affirming care. Rather, as the White House's February 3 Statement makes clear, the true purpose of the January 28 Order was to "downsize or eliminate" all (italicized) gender-afirming care. February 3 Statement, supra (italicized) (celebrating various hospitals' announcements that because of the January 28 Order each would discontinue gender affirming care programs. | QueerDoc DOJ appeal](https://queerdoc.com/media/2026/02/image.png)
The government’s January 28th executive order and the February 3rd statement:
Judge Whitehead agreed that the DOJ was hiding what they were really trying to do and that they were overly broad in their demands.
You can read Judge Whitehead’s order here.
We particularly like these bits:
On why the government seeks information:
“The Government seeks the “intended effect” of its Executive Orders and these subpoenas to “downsize or eliminate” all gender-affirming care….No clearer evidence of improper purpose could exist than the Government’s own repeated declarations that it seeks to end the very practice it claims to be merely investigating.”
On how the government went about doing it:
“The mismatch between DOJ’s stated investigation and QueerDoc’s actual operations further reveals the subpoena’s pretextual nature. The Attorney General directed investigations of “manufacturers and distributors engaged in misbranding” and providers submitting false insurance claims. QueerDoc is neither. It prescribes medications but does not manufacture or distribute them. It provides patients with superbills but does not submit insurance claims. [Dkt. No. 13 at 3–4.] This mismatch is not just a technicality. It suggests that DOJ issued the subpoena first and searched for a justification second. No legitimate investigation would demand thousands of patient records from an entity that cannot, by definition, commit the violations being investigated. DOJ’s inability to articulate why it is investigating QueerDoc specifically—beyond noting it is a “prominent” provider—confirms that QueerDoc was targeted for what it does (provide gender affirming care) rather than how it does it (through any unlawful means).”
In short, Judge Whitehead told the DOJ that, no, they could not demand that we give them patient, employment, and administrative records.
On November 21, 2025, the government appealed the ruling to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
They have the right to do this, and we expected that they would.
What’s Next? The Appeal
Oral argument for the appeal is scheduled for MARCH 6, 2026.
Greater Context
Twenty or so organizations also received subpoenas. Most of them, as far as we know, were major medical institutions like the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (and Pittsburgh, and Denver, and Los Angeles, and Boston, and Seattle, and Children’s National in Maryland.)
Each entity that has challenged the subpoena has won the first round in court, quashing or limiting their subpoenas. In some cases, the government has been allowed to request patient data scrubbed of identifying information. A suit brought by families receiving care at Children’s Los Angeles was settled by the government and its request for identifying data was withdrawn. We’re attempting to keep track of cases at (see our blog legal challenges to the Trump Administration).
As of early February, the DOJ has appealed in:
- Our case (Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals).
- Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (Third Circuit Court of Appeals).
- Boston Children’s Hospital (First Circuit Court of Appeals).
- Children’s National (Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals).
- For more information on how the federal appeals process works, see
At the same time that subpoenas are being quashed in the courts, several large institutions have stopped providing care to trans and gender-expansive youth.
- NBC4Washington: Children’s National Hospital to stop prescribing gender-affirming medication (7/23/25)
- NBC News:At least 21 hospitals have ended or restricted trans care for minors since January (8/24/25)
- NBC 9News: Children’s Hospital, Denver Health end gender-affirming care to minors (1/2/26)
- npr KQED: California’s largest children’s hospital system ends gender-affirming care for youth (1/6/26)
- Erin In The Morning: Lurie Children’s Rolls Back Trans Youth Care (1/21/26)
- Erin In The Morning: Mary Bridge Children’s Hospital in WA Shuts Down Youth Gender Clinic Amidst Federal Funding Threat (1/29/26)
We are still providing medically-necessary, evidence-based, life-saving medical care.