Federal Judge Blocks DOGE's Access to Social Security Data Amid Concerns for Privacy and Security
A U.S. judge halts DOGE's access to sensitive Social Security data, emphasizing privacy concerns and lack of justification for data access.
Overview
U.S. District Judge Ellen Lipton Hollander has temporarily blocked the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from accessing sensitive Social Security Administration (SSA) records, citing privacy law violations and inadequate justification. The ruling came after a lawsuit from unions and advocacy groups who argued that DOGE's extensive data access posed risks to millions of Americans. The judge criticized DOGE's approach as a 'fishing expedition' without concrete evidence of fraud. The decision mandates the destruction of non-anonymized data held by DOGE and allows only anonymized access going forward.
Content generated by AI—learn more or report issue.
Get both sides in 5 minutes with our daily newsletter.
Analysis
- The judge ruled against DOGE's unrestricted access to sensitive Social Security data, labelling their approach as excessive and lacking justification for privacy violations.
- DOGE's expansive data access, described as a 'fishing expedition,' could endanger personal information of millions and did not present evidence of a fraud epidemic.
- Union leaders hailed the decision as a victory for privacy protection, underscoring the primary concern over the safety and confidentiality of Social Security beneficiaries' information.
Articles (4)
Center (1)
No highlight available for this article.
ABC News·3M·FAQ
The lawsuit was prompted by concerns from labor unions and advocacy groups that DOGE's access to sensitive Social Security data violated privacy laws and posed significant information security risks.
DOGE was accessing sensitive data including Social Security numbers, medical records, and financial information. The judge found this access to be unjustified and potentially harmful to millions of Americans' privacy.
DOGE might regain access to sensitive data if they complete required training and provide a detailed explanation of their need for non-anonymized data, potentially subject to court review.
The judge describes DOGE's approach as a 'fishing expedition' based on little more than suspicion, without concrete evidence of fraud.
History
- This story does not have any previous versions.