Epic Systems Sued Over Alleged EHR Monopoly, Disability Access

Lawsuit claims Epic's dominance restricts disabled individuals' access to medical records.

Published on Mar. 9, 2026

Epic Systems Corp. was sued in federal court for allegedly monopolizing the electronic health record (EHR) market and restricting disabled individuals' access to their medical records. The lawsuit, filed by the American Association of Disability Justice and two individual plaintiffs, claims Epic's control over medical record portals like MyChart makes it difficult for disabled people to retrieve their records and obtain Social Security disability benefits.

Why it matters

This case highlights growing concerns about the power and influence of major EHR vendors like Epic, which dominate the healthcare technology landscape. The lawsuit alleges Epic's monopolistic practices are hindering access to critical medical information for vulnerable populations, raising questions about equitable access to healthcare data.

The details

The proposed class action lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, claims Epic's MyChart patient portal requires two-factor authentication that can be challenging for some disabled individuals to navigate. This allegedly makes it difficult for them to retrieve their own medical records, which are often essential for obtaining Social Security disability benefits.

  • The lawsuit was filed on March 9, 2026.

The players

Epic Systems Corp.

A leading provider of electronic health record (EHR) systems used by hospitals and healthcare providers across the United States.

American Association of Disability Justice

A non-profit organization that advocates for the rights of disabled individuals, including access to healthcare and government benefits.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What’s next

The court will need to determine if the lawsuit can proceed as a class action and whether the plaintiffs have sufficient evidence to prove Epic's alleged monopolistic practices.

The takeaway

This case highlights the growing influence of major healthcare technology companies and the need to ensure equitable access to medical records and services, especially for vulnerable populations like those with disabilities.