Judge Blocks Elon Musk’s DOGE From Social Security \ Newslooks \ Washington DC \ Mary Sidiqi \ Evening Edition \ A federal judge temporarily blocked Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from accessing Social Security data, calling their actions a “fishing expedition.” The order demands deletion of any personal data obtained and limits future access to redacted information. Labor unions and advocacy groups sued, citing privacy violations and security risks.
Judge Blocks DOGE Access to Social Security Quick Looks
- Judge Ellen Hollander temporarily barred DOGE from Social Security data systems.
- The ruling labels DOGE’s fraud searches as an unjustified “fishing expedition.”
- DOGE must delete all personally identifiable information in its possession.
- Future access limited to redacted data after training and background checks.
- Lawsuit filed by labor unions, retirees, and Democracy Forward.
- Plaintiffs claim DOGE access violates privacy laws and endangers data security.
- Musk called Social Security a “ponzi scheme” and targeted it for waste reduction.
- Seven DOGE team members had read-only access to sensitive data at SSA.
- Government attorneys claimed DOGE’s actions aligned with agency practices.
- Nearly two dozen lawsuits have been filed against DOGE’s sweeping actions.
Deep Look
A federal judge in Maryland issued a temporary order on Thursday halting Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from accessing sensitive Social Security Administration (SSA) databases, citing privacy concerns and labeling the agency’s actions as an unjustified “fishing expedition.” The decision marks another major setback for Musk’s controversial government cost-cutting initiative, which has faced growing legal scrutiny and public outcry since its inception.
U.S. District Judge Ellen Hollander, appointed by President Barack Obama and based in Baltimore, ruled that DOGE’s intrusion into SSA systems lacked sufficient justification and posed significant privacy risks to millions of Americans whose personal information is stored in those databases. In her order, she stated, “The DOGE Team is essentially engaged in a fishing expedition at SSA, in search of a fraud epidemic, based on little more than suspicion.”
The ruling not only blocks DOGE’s access but also mandates that the team delete any personally identifiable data they may have obtained. While DOGE staffers will still be allowed limited access to redacted data — but only after undergoing comprehensive training and security background checks — their unfettered reach into Social Security systems has been effectively curtailed.
The decision follows a lawsuit filed by labor unions, retiree groups, and the advocacy organization Democracy Forward, who argued that DOGE’s unchecked access to SSA databases violated federal privacy laws and posed immediate cybersecurity threats. Among the evidence submitted was a declaration from Tiffany Flick, the former acting chief of staff to the SSA’s acting commissioner, who described DOGE’s sudden arrival at the agency shortly after President Donald Trump’s inauguration. Flick recounted how DOGE staff pressed for immediate access to sensitive data, despite the agency’s strict internal protocols designed to protect such information.
According to court documents, DOGE had deployed a 10-person team to the SSA, with seven members granted read-only access to personally identifiable information. Attorneys for the federal government argued that such access was consistent with existing agency practices, where internal teams routinely search databases for irregularities and potential fraud. However, plaintiffs countered that DOGE’s broad, unsupervised reach was unprecedented and alarming.
Lee Saunders, president of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, celebrated the ruling, calling it “a major win for working people and retirees across the country.” Skye Perryman, president of Democracy Forward, echoed that sentiment, stating, “The court recognized the real and immediate dangers of DOGE’s reckless actions and took action to stop it.”
Elon Musk, who leads DOGE as part of his government efficiency mandate under the Trump administration, has repeatedly described Social Security as a “ponzi scheme” and positioned the program as a focal point in his campaign to cut government waste. However, critics argue that the effort is less about efficiency and more about invasive overreach into sensitive government operations.
DOGE’s reach has extended beyond the SSA. Court documents and investigative reports show the team has gained some level of access to data systems at the U.S. Treasury Department and the IRS as well. The scope of their activities, largely kept under wraps until recently, has sparked nearly two dozen lawsuits in federal courts across the country.
Several judges, including Hollander, have questioned whether DOGE’s sweeping fraud-hunting efforts outweigh the risks of exposing personal data. While some courts have permitted the team’s actions to continue under strict conditions, others, like this latest ruling, have drawn firmer boundaries.
In her decision, Judge Hollander highlighted that DOGE’s search methods appeared based on misunderstandings and inaccurate assumptions about fraud levels within the SSA. Flick’s testimony underscored this, noting that the team’s approach lacked focus and often ignored established fraud detection protocols.
The lawsuit revealed that DOGE team members entered the SSA just days after Trump’s inauguration, with urgent demands for access that alarmed long-serving agency officials. The aggressive push for immediate system access bypassed typical clearance procedures, raising red flags among SSA leadership.
While the White House has yet to comment on the ruling, the case has amplified concerns over how far DOGE will go in its mission to slash federal spending. Critics argue that the department’s unchecked power endangers privacy rights and risks undermining the integrity of key government services.
As legal challenges mount, the future of DOGE’s operations remains uncertain. This latest ruling sends a clear message that federal oversight and privacy laws cannot be disregarded, even in the name of government efficiency. Whether Musk and his team will appeal the decision is unclear, but the battle over DOGE’s authority and practices is far from over.
With increasing public scrutiny and judicial pushback, the controversy surrounding DOGE highlights the broader tension between government reform efforts and the safeguarding of sensitive personal data. For now, millions of Americans can take some comfort in knowing that their Social Security records are protected from what Judge Hollander described as an overreaching and poorly justified intrusion.
Judge Blocks Elon Musk’s
You must Register or Login to post a comment.