Judge Mary – A federal judge nominated by President Donald Trump referred U.S. Department of Justice attorneys for potential discipline after ruling that prosecutors misrepresented and withheld information while trying to keep a subpoena alive against a Rhode Island hospit
For weeks, the fight over a civil subpoena has played out in court filings and declarations. Then, in a ruling issued after she quashed the subpoena, U.S. District Court Judge Mary McElroy directed a referral for potential discipline aimed at the Justice Department attorneys who pushed her to keep it alive.
McElroy, a judge nominated by President Donald Trump and approved by the U.S. Senate during Trump’s first term, made the referral after she quashed the subpoena forcing a Rhode Island hospital to hand over records about its provision of gender-affirming care to transgender youth.
Her decision landed after a separate May 14 ruling last month. when she said DOJ lawyers misrepresented and withheld information from courts in an effort to compel the hospital’s compliance. She also cited the broader pattern of other federal courts stepping in to limit similar subpoenas sent last summer to more than 20 doctors and hospitals.
In her May 14 ruling, McElroy wrote: “DOJ has proven unworthy of this trust at every point in this case.” She said DOJ lawyers had not only misstated facts, but also withheld information from her court and from a federal court in the Northern District of Texas.
McElroy said the conduct was meant to protect investigative tactics she believed had already been rejected by other courts. She wrote that DOJ lawyers sought instead “a distant forum that DOJ deems friendly to its political positions. ” pointing to the Justice Department’s decision to pursue an order from a Texas judge that would compel the hospital to turn over the documents the subpoena sought.
She also took direct aim at a specific claim made in a DOJ lawyer’s declaration. In it. McElroy wrote. a DOJ lawyer said Rhode Island Hospital had failed to comply with the subpoena and stopped communicating with the department in February. McElroy wrote that the statement was misleading — and “clearly misleading. if not utterly false” — because hospital representatives had responded to a February email from DOJ lawyers.
“This reckless disregard for the duty of candor owed to a federal court is appalling,” McElroy wrote.
The records at issue were expansive. According to the subpoenas. the Justice Department demanded birth dates. Social Security numbers. and addresses of every patient who received transgender care at the hospital over the past five years. The requests also sought all documents detailing adverse side effects in minor patients who received gender-related care. along with assessments used as a basis for prescribing puberty blockers or hormone therapy. The subpoenas further requested patient intake forms and guardian authorization.
DOJ has argued that it needed that information to investigate possible fraud or unlawful off-label promotion of drugs. During a hearing in Rhode Island, Assistant U.S. Attorney Brantley Mayers told McElroy that the investigation was taking place in the Northern District of Texas. where the court’s chief judge ordered Rhode Island Hospital to comply with the subpoena before McElroy’s decision voided the subpoena.
Mayers said DOJ was investigating potential “misbranding” of drugs approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, including puberty blockers for young people. He acknowledged that off-label prescribing is legal. while saying the government was concerned that pharmaceutical companies were providing “financial incentives” to Rhode Island doctors to prescribe the drugs.
McElroy rejected that justification. She wrote that the administration had publicly characterized gender-affirming care for minors as abuse, directed the DOJ to bring its practice to an end, and celebrated when hospitals curtailed such programs as a result of the subpoena campaign.
The dispute did not end with the judge’s ruling. The Justice Department said it would appeal McElroy’s order, and its Civil Division denied the judge’s claims in a statement earlier this week.
The department’s statement said accusations against Department attorneys are rare and serious. and that the Civil Division had reviewed McElroy’s allegations and found them “without merit.” It said the attorneys did not misrepresent facts. withhold relevant information. or otherwise mislead the court. The department also said it “stands behind its attorneys without reservation” and has appealed the district court’s order.
McElroy’s referral adds another layer to a case already marked by competing claims about credibility and authority — and by a broader judicial backlash against expansive subpoenas aimed at medical providers.
Mary McElroy DOJ attorneys Civil Division subpoena Rhode Island Hospital gender-affirming care transgender youth Brantley Mayers Northern District of Texas discipline referral