Judge Halts DOGE’s Access to Federal Personal Data/ Newslooks/ WASHINGTON/ J. Mansour/ Morning Edition/ A federal judge issued an injunction blocking Elon Musk’s DOGE agency from accessing personal data across major U.S. departments. The lawsuit, led by teachers’ unions, argues the Trump administration violated privacy laws. The ruling limits DOGE’s access as legal challenges continue.
DOGE Privacy Battle Quick Looks
- Judge Deborah Boardman issues injunction limiting DOGE’s access to private data.
- Case alleges federal privacy laws were violated under Trump administration.
- Data included income, Social Security numbers, addresses, and more.
- Lawsuit filed by American Federation of Teachers and allied groups.
- Judge rules government failed to justify DOGE’s need for mass data access.
- Trump created DOGE to root out waste and restructure agencies.
- DOGE allegedly accessed student loan data to undermine Education Department.
- Injunction protects data of individual plaintiffs and union members.
- Trump recently signed order to dismantle the Education Department.
- A second Maryland case also blocked DOGE’s Social Security database access.
Judge Halts DOGE’s Access to Federal Personal Data
Deep Look
In a significant legal development, U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman issued a preliminary injunction Monday that temporarily halts Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from accessing sensitive personal data maintained by the Education Department, Treasury Department, and Office of Personnel Management. The ruling comes as a broader legal challenge unfolds over alleged privacy violations under President Donald Trump’s administration.
The case, filed in federal court in Maryland by a coalition led by the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), accuses the administration of unlawfully granting DOGE access to vast amounts of personal information—ranging from Social Security numbers and income data to home addresses and citizenship status—without the knowledge or consent of affected individuals.
The preliminary injunction builds on a prior temporary restraining order and provides more extended protection while the court deliberates. Judge Boardman, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, found that the plaintiffs are likely to succeed in proving that the administration violated federal privacy laws. She also concluded that the administration had failed to offer a compelling justification for why DOGE required access to such large volumes of data to fulfill its mandate.
“They trusted the federal government to safeguard their information. That public trust likely has been breached,” Boardman wrote in her opinion, reinforcing the argument that the administration’s actions may have gone beyond legal bounds.
According to the lawsuit, instead of using federal data for legitimate program administration—particularly concerning federal student loans—DOGE accessed records to further an agenda of dismantling the Education Department itself. This claim coincides with Trump’s recent executive order to dissolve the department, reassigning student loan responsibilities to the Small Business Administration and programs for students with disabilities to the Department of Health and Human Services.
DOGE was established by the Trump administration and placed under Elon Musk’s leadership with a mission to streamline federal operations, eliminate inefficiencies, and reduce fraud. However, critics argue that it has been used as a tool for deeper political aims, including reengineering federal agencies and bypassing privacy norms.
The plaintiffs include several individual federal benefit recipients, such as military veterans with student loans, along with major labor organizations like the National Active and Retired Federal Employees Association and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers. The American Federation of Teachers, representing 1.8 million members, spearheaded the legal action, citing serious breaches of data protection and administrative integrity.
Judge Boardman’s order applies specifically to the individual plaintiffs and members of the organizations involved in the case. However, it sets a precedent that could shape broader data access policies within the federal government moving forward. The ruling emphasizes that “no matter how important or urgent the President’s DOGE agenda may be, federal agencies must execute it in accordance with the law.”
This case follows a related injunction issued in Maryland last week that also blocked DOGE’s access to Social Security databases, which similarly house millions of Americans’ private data.
As legal battles over data privacy and executive authority intensify, the court’s decision serves as a strong check on the reach of new federal programs created under the Trump administration.
You must Register or Login to post a comment.