Texas officials have withdrawn a lawsuit against an El Paso pediatric endocrinologist accused of illegally providing gender-affirming care to minors after a review concluded no legal violations occurred, the state attorney general’s office said Wednesday.
The case against Dr. Hector Granados, one of the first physicians targeted by Texas under a 2023 ban on many forms of gender-affirming medical care for minors, was filed last October. The suit accused Granados of falsifying medical records and continuing to prescribe treatments to transgender youth in violation of the law. Paxton’s office described him as a “scofflaw” in its initial court filing.
After a review of the evidence and Granados’ complete medical records, the Texas attorney general’s office said it found "no legal violations were found" and quietly withdrew the lawsuit last week. The office said the other two physicians sued by Texas — identified as Dr. May Lau and Dr. M. Brett Cooper — will “face justice for hurting Texas kids both physically and mentally.” The cases against the two Dallas-area doctors remain active.
Granados said state officials never contacted him before filing the suit and that he had taken steps to stop providing gender-affirming care to minors before the ban took effect. He acknowledged that after the law went into effect he continued to prescribe puberty blockers and hormone treatments for patients with endocrine disorders, saying those treatments were intended to address conditions in which hormone levels are abnormally high or low rather than to facilitate gender transition.
Granados’ attorney, Mark Bracken, said he and state lawyers entered into an agreed protective order that allowed the doctor to confidentially produce patient records demonstrating compliance with the law. The original lawsuit cited a 2015 news article quoting Granados and referenced medical articles he had written, and it included details about unnamed patients, such as ages and prescriptions.
The Texas action was part of a broader national push by Republican-led states to restrict gender-affirming care for minors. The U.S. Supreme Court in June upheld state authority to ban such medical treatment for transgender minors, and advocates and legal trackers say at least 27 states have adopted laws restricting or banning the care. Penalties for violating bans vary by state; in Texas the consequences are civil and administrative, including fines and possible revocation of medical licenses, rather than criminal prosecution.
Harper Seldin, a staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union’s LGBTQ & HIV Project, said that even when a government lawsuit is dropped the legal fight imposes a heavy toll on providers and patients. "I think this continues to be best understood as part of the Texas AG’s campaign to intimidate medical providers," Seldin said.
Legal scholars noted that it is uncommon for a state to dismiss a high-profile enforcement action citing an absence of violations after initiating suit. Peter Salib, an assistant professor of law at the University of Houston Law Center, said states normally gather substantial information before filing and that the withdrawal is “unusual.”
Paxton, a prominent conservative elected official and ally of former President Donald Trump who is running for the U.S. Senate, has positioned himself as a national leader on hard-right social issues. His office has continued to emphasize aggressive enforcement of the state’s ban, saying it will pursue other providers it contends are violating the law. In a court filing in one of the other cases, an attorney in Paxton’s office said prosecutors had subpoenaed provider reports for testosterone prescriptions from the Texas Prescription Monitoring Program.
Granados said he welcomed the dismissal and that the lawsuit had taken an emotional and professional toll. "It always puts a toll on you and how you feel," he said, adding that he wished state officials had given him an opportunity to show he stopped providing gender-affirming care to minors before the lawsuit was filed.
The withdrawn case leaves questions about how Texas will pursue other enforcement actions and how providers will respond to continued legal scrutiny amid a shifting national legal landscape on transgender medical care for minors.