The Trump Administration faced significant legal challenges regarding its request for records associated with gender-affirming care at Children’s Hospital Colorado. A federal magistrate judge has recommended that the subpoena issued by the Justice Department be dismissed, citing a lack of reasonable relevance.
Legal Ruling on Subpoena for Gender Care Records
Magistrate Cyrus Y. Chung issued the recommendation on Monday, noting that the subpoena appeared more targeted at the hospital’s provision of care rather than investigating any unlawful activities. He stated that the administration’s characterization of such care as “barbaric” raised questions about the intent behind the request.
Federal Government’s Efforts
- The Department of Justice served the subpoena on July 14, 2025.
- The request sought personnel files, billing data, and patient records from the TRUE Center for Gender Diversity.
Current Status of Gender-Affirming Care
Following the subpoena, Children’s Hospital Colorado and Denver Health have temporarily suspended gender-affirming care for minors. This includes the cessation of new prescriptions and the renewal of existing prescriptions for puberty blockers or hormone treatments.
Judicial Findings
Judge Chung emphasized that while the government holds broad investigatory powers, these are not limitless. He criticized the sweeping nature of the subpoena, which, according to him, resembled a “dragnet” for exhaustive patient data rather than a focused inquiry into potential violations of federal law.
In his recommendation, Chung expressed skepticism regarding the government’s justification for the subpoena, labeling it as “pretextual.” The request failed to establish a connection to any suspected wrongdoing, highlighting that gender-affirming care is legal in Colorado and not currently subject to congressional investigation.
Next Steps
The government now has a two-week period to file objections to the magistrate’s recommendation. Ultimately, a federal District Court judge will make the final determination on the matter.
In conclusion, the attempt to obtain sensitive gender care records raises questions about governmental oversight and individual medical rights. The judicial system has signaled a protective stance toward the hospital’s practices amid ongoing debates about gender-affirming care nationwide.
