US Supreme Court Grants DOGE Access to Social Security Info

On Friday, the US Supreme Court granted the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), an integral component of President Donald Trump’s initiative to reduce the federal workforce, broad access to personal information from Social Security Administration (SSA) data systems during an ongoing legal dispute.

The court acted on a request from the Justice Department, temporarily staying a ruling by Maryland-based US District Judge Ellen Hollander, which had significantly restricted DOGE’s ability to access “personally identifiable information” from data, including medical and financial records, while a lower court’s litigation takes place. Hollander had determined that unrestricted access for DOGE could likely breach a federal privacy statute.

The Supreme Court’s short, unsigned order did not explain the reasoning behind its support for DOGE, which holds a 6-3 conservative majority, while the three liberal justices opposed the decision.

Liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, joined by fellow liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor, criticized the majority for allowing DOGE “unfettered access to data” without demonstrating any necessity or desire to abide by existing privacy protections.

In an additional ruling on Friday, the Supreme Court upheld its block on judicial orders requiring DOGE to provide records to a government watchdog group seeking information about its creation under Trump and Musk.

DOGE was established under the Trump administration, alongside billionaire Elon Musk’s efforts to streamline the federal workforce, reconfigure the government, and eliminate what they deemed wasteful expenses. Musk officially wrapped up his government role on May 30.

Two labor unions and an advocacy group filed a lawsuit to prevent DOGE from accessing sensitive data at the SSA, including Social Security numbers, bank account details, tax information, earnings histories, and immigration records.

The SSA is a significant provider of government benefits, issuing monthly checks to over 70 million individuals, including seniors and disabled citizens.

Democracy Forward, a liberal legal organization representing the plaintiffs, stated that Friday’s order jeopardizes the privacy of millions of Americans.

“Elon Musk may have departed from Washington, DC, but his influence continues to harm countless individuals,” the group asserted in a statement. “We will use every legal avenue available to protect the public’s most sensitive data as this case advances.”

The plaintiffs contended in their lawsuit that the SSA had been “ransacked,” with DOGE members appointed without the necessary vetting or training, yet demanding access to some of the agency’s most confidential data systems.

In an April 17 ruling, Hollander noted that DOGE had not adequately justified why its mission required “unprecedented, unfettered access to virtually all of SSA’s data systems.”

“For nearly 90 years, the SSA has adhered to a foundational principle of privacy regarding its records,” Hollander wrote. “This case reveals a significant breach in that foundation.”

Hollander issued a preliminary injunction that barred DOGE personnel and their affiliates from accessing personal information, with very limited exceptions. The judge allowed DOGE’s associates to access data that had been anonymized, provided they had completed the necessary training and passed background checks.

Additionally, Hollander directed DOGE affiliates to “disgorge and delete” any personal information they had previously acquired.

The 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals, located in Richmond, Virginia, voted 9-6 on April 30 to uphold Hollander’s restrictions on DOGE’s unlimited access to SSA records.

Lawyers from the Justice Department described Hollander’s order in their Supreme Court appeal as an overreach by the judiciary.

“The district court is compelling the executive branch to prevent employees tasked with modernizing government information systems from accessing the necessary data,” they wrote.

The six dissenting judges argued that this case should have been approached as other cases had been, including one in which a 4th Circuit panel voted 2-1 to allow DOGE access to data from the US Treasury, Education Departments, and the Office of Personnel Management.

In a concurring opinion, seven judges who voted against DOGE emphasized that the Social Security data case was “substantially stronger” due to the “vastly greater stakes,” referencing “detailed and extremely sensitive Social Security records,” such as family court documents, school records for children, mental health treatment histories, and credit card information.