The Texas Supreme Court ruled Friday that the Texas Attorney General’s Office can require LGBTQ advocacy group PFLAG to turn over documents related to an investigation into medical care for transgender minors.
The court overturned a previous district court decision that had largely blocked the AG’s office from seeking certain records.
The dispute stems from a civil investigative demand issued in 2024 by Texas AG Ken Paxton. His office is investigating whether medical providers may have violated state law by misleading insurers about treatments provided to transgender minors.
[…]
In Friday’s ruling, the Texas Supreme Court said the lower court improperly interfered with the state’s investigation, emphasizing that under state law, the AG doesn’t have to prove someone has relevant documents before requesting them.
“The district court should not have faulted the Attorney General’s office for failing to ‘produce evidence to suggest that PFLAG likely possessed information relevant to the OAG’s investigation.’ That was not the Attorney General’s burden,” the ruling read. “Under the statute’s plain text, belief — not proof — will suffice.”
The court said PFLAG must turn over several categories of documents, including:
- Communications about “contingency plans” or alternative care options
- Referrals or lists of health care providers for transgender youth in Texas
- Communications involving certain health care providers referenced in the investigation
- Records tied to the executive director’s comments in the lawsuit affidavit about families seeking ways to maintain care in Texas
However, the court said some other requests — including certain internal organizational documents — weren’t clearly relevant and don’t have to be handed over.
The justices noted the AG “agreed to allow redactions to preserve anonymity” for families or children named in the documents. State law also limits how the AG’s office can disclose materials gathered through investigative demands.
The case now returns to Travis County district court for further proceedings.
See here and here for the background. This sucks, no two ways around it. Given that it took two years to get from the original injunction to this point, I guess the best strategy for PFLAG is to draw things out as much as they can, while pushing for maximum redactions and minimal scope. Easier said than done, and the longer this takes the costlier it will be for them, but the point is to try to push this out past the end of the year in the hope that a non-sociopath will be elected as AG in November. Not the most substantive of hopes, I understand, but at least it’s something.
K Paxton and so many of his colleagues are suspiciously focused on everyone’s private parts.