California Seeks to Shield Abortion and Trans Care Data from Federal Subpoenas

A proposed state law would require medical providers to notify officials before complying with federal demands for patient records related to legally protected health services.

Apr. 16, 2026 at 2:08pm

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A dimly lit, cinematic painting of an empty medical examination room, with warm sunlight streaming in through the window and long shadows cast across the floor, creating a sense of unease and uncertainty about the future of healthcare privacy.The proposed California law aims to shield sensitive medical data from federal interference, but its constitutionality remains uncertain.Los Angeles Today

California lawmakers have introduced a bill that would require medical providers and businesses to notify the state attorney general before complying with federal subpoenas seeking information about abortion, gender-affirming care, or other legally protected health services. The measure is a response to efforts by the Trump administration and conservative states to block or criminalize such services. However, legal experts say the proposed law may not survive a constitutional challenge under the Supremacy Clause, which gives federal law precedence over state law.

Why it matters

This legislation is part of California's broader efforts to shield medical professionals and patient data from conservative states and the federal government as abortion and transgender health care become increasingly politicized issues. The bill aims to protect patient privacy and safety, but it could put providers in a difficult position if they are caught between state and federal law.

The details

Under Assembly Bill 1930, any medical provider or business served with a civil, criminal, or regulatory inquiry, investigation, subpoena, or summons seeking 'legally protected health care activity' would be required to notify the state attorney general, as well as the patients and providers involved, before complying. The measure is co-sponsored by Attorney General Rob Bonta and LGBTQ+ civil rights group Equality California. It was introduced after the Trump administration issued subpoenas to 20 medical providers that offer gender-affirming care for minors, seeking patient records. Some legal experts say the proposed law may be unconstitutional under the Supremacy Clause, which gives federal law precedence over state law.

  • In 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, leading to abortion bans in several states.
  • In 2023, the Trump administration issued subpoenas to 20 medical providers that offer gender-affirming care for minors, seeking patient records.
  • In 2026, the California Legislature is considering Assembly Bill 1930 to shield abortion and transgender health care data from federal subpoenas.

The players

Rick Chavez Zbur

The Democratic Assemblymember from Los Angeles who introduced Assembly Bill 1930.

Rob Bonta

The California Attorney General who is co-sponsoring Assembly Bill 1930.

Equality California

The LGBTQ+ civil rights group that is co-sponsoring Assembly Bill 1930.

Bill Essayli

A former Republican state lawmaker who oversees the U.S. Attorney's Office in Los Angeles and says the proposed California law would be unconstitutional.

Erwin Chemerinsky

The dean of UC Berkeley School of Law, who suggests the measure may conflict with the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“No one should have to fear that seeking lawful medical care in the state of California could put their privacy and their safety at risk.”

— Rick Chavez Zbur, Assemblymember

“Any effort by California to restrict the federal government's lawful use of, or compliance with, subpoenas is unlawful and unenforceable under the Supremacy Clause.”

— Bill Essayli, Former Republican state lawmaker

“If there's a conflict between federal law on the one hand, and state or local (law) on the other, federal law wins out.”

— Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean, UC Berkeley School of Law

What’s next

The California Assembly Public Safety Committee is scheduled to discuss Assembly Bill 1930 on Tuesday. If the bill passes the Legislature, it will go to the governor for signature or veto.

The takeaway

This legislation highlights the ongoing tension between California's efforts to protect abortion and transgender health care, and the federal government's attempts to gather data and potentially restrict access to these services. The outcome of this bill could have significant implications for medical providers and patients in California.