Overview of the Lawsuit
Epic Systems Corporation now faces a new federal antitrust lawsuit. Filed on March 9, 2026, in the US District Court for the Western District of Texas, the case targets the dominant electronic health records (EHR) company over alleged monopoly practices. The American Association of Disability Justice, joined by two individual plaintiffs, brought the proposed class action against Epic. Their central claim: Epic uses its market dominance to control how patients access their own medical records — and disabled individuals suffer the most.
Moreover, the suit accuses Epic of restricting disabled individuals from obtaining records needed to support Social Security disability benefit claims, raising both antitrust and civil rights concerns.
What the Plaintiffs Allege
Monopoly Control Over Medical Records
The complaint argues that Epic holds a stranglehold on the EHR market. The company’s software houses more than 325 million patient records, covering over 90% of all US citizens. Its systems are installed in more than 3,600 hospitals nationwide, giving Epic roughly 42% of the acute care hospital market — far ahead of competitors like Oracle Cerner and Meditech.
Plaintiffs argue this dominance allows Epic to act as the sole gatekeeper of patient data. As a result, hospitals find it nearly impossible to leave the Epic ecosystem. Switching EHR vendors can take up to a decade and cost more than $1 billion, according to prior litigation records.
Barriers for Disabled Patients
The lawsuit specifically highlights how Epic’s system creates practical barriers for disabled individuals. To access medical records through the Epic MyChart portal, users must complete two-factor authentication — a step that many disabled people find difficult or impossible to complete independently. Furthermore, the complaint alleges that Epic’s portal structure fragments patient records across multiple systems. This fragmentation forces disabled individuals to navigate several different portals to compile a complete medical history, a critical step when applying for Social Security disability benefits.
How MyChart Restricts Records Access
Two-Factor Authentication as a Barrier
The MyChart portal requires two-factor authentication for every login. For patients without disabilities, this is a minor inconvenience. For many disabled individuals, however, this step can be a significant obstacle. The plaintiffs argue that Epic has not taken adequate steps to make this process accessible, despite being the dominant force in the market.
Fragmented Records Across Portals
Additionally, the lawsuit alleges that Epic’s system deliberately keeps records siloed. When a patient receives care at facilities using different software, their records do not flow freely. Instead, each provider maintains separate data, and patients must retrieve records from each portal individually. For disabled individuals building a Social Security disability case, this fragmentation means delays, confusion, and incomplete documentation.
Epic’s Growing Legal Battles
A Pattern of Antitrust Scrutiny
This federal disability-focused lawsuit is only the latest in a growing series of legal challenges against Epic. In December 2025, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sued Epic under the Texas Free Enterprise and Antitrust Act, accusing the company of unlawfully monopolizing the EHR market. That suit also accused Epic of restricting parental access to minor children’s medical records through MyChart’s default settings, which limit proxy access when a child turns 12.
Rival Companies Also Fighting Back
Beyond government actors, competing companies have also taken Epic to court. Particle Health and CureIS Healthcare have both filed federal antitrust lawsuits, alleging that Epic uses its market position to crush competition in healthcare data platforms. In September 2025, a federal judge allowed the Particle Health suit to proceed, signaling that courts are willing to scrutinize Epic’s practices.
Together, these cases paint a picture of an industry giant that critics say has placed its own commercial interests above the principles of open, interoperable healthcare data.
What This Means for Patients
Real-World Consequences of Fragmented Data
For everyday patients, these legal battles are not just courtroom abstractions. When medical records are incomplete or hard to access, healthcare providers make decisions without the full picture. The Texas AG’s complaint noted that patients experience “diminished quality of health care” because their physicians receive “incomplete or out-of-date patient health records” as a direct result of Epic’s data practices.
For disabled individuals specifically, fragmented records can translate into denied or delayed Social Security benefits. Furthermore, the inability to easily retrieve complete records from a unified source puts an unfair burden on some of the most vulnerable patients in the healthcare system.
Epic’s Response
Epic has consistently denied wrongdoing across all pending lawsuits. In response to the Texas AG complaint, an Epic spokesperson called the action “flawed and misguided,” adding that it reflects a failure to understand Epic’s business model. The company points to its interoperability achievements, noting that health systems using Epic exchange records with nearly 1,000 patient-facing apps roughly 2 billion times per year. Epic also states it facilitates over 725 million health record exchanges each month — more than any other EHR vendor.
The company has not yet issued a formal public statement specific to the March 2026 federal disability lawsuit.
