In Washington, a federal judge imposed a temporary halt on a group helmed by billionaire Elon Musk, known as the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), from accessing Social Security systems that store personal data of millions of Americans. The decision came as the judge described the group’s actions as a “fishing expedition.” The ruling also mandated the deletion of any personally identifiable information that DOGE might possess.
U.S. District Judge Ellen Hollander from Maryland concluded that DOGE’s team gained extensive access to sensitive data within the Social Security Administration (SSA) without proper justification, aiming to detect fraud. She stated that their pursuit appeared to be based on mere suspicion, without concrete evidence of a rampant fraud issue.
Nonetheless, the order does allow DOGE staff to access information that has been anonymized or stripped of personal identifiers. This is provided that they undergo necessary training and security checks. Judge Hollander acknowledged the importance of addressing potential fraud, waste, and mismanagement within the SSA, but emphasized that legal boundaries must not be overlooked for such objectives.
The Trump administration previously defended DOGE’s mission as a strategy to curb federal government waste, with Musk highlighting Social Security as an area susceptible to fraud and likening it to a “Ponzi scheme.” Musk argued that reducing inefficiencies in the program could substantially decrease federal expenditure.
This ruling, pending appeal, emerged from a lawsuit by labor unions, retirees, and the advocacy group Democracy Forward. The plaintiffs claimed that DOGE’s access violated privacy laws and posed serious security threats. A declaration from a former Social Security official revealed concerns over the exposure of sensitive data resulting from DOGE’s intrusion.
Neither the White House nor DOGE’s representatives provided immediate comments on the order. Notably, the governmental team included ten federal employees at the SSA, with seven having read-only access to systems containing personal information. The government justified that DOGE’s actions were consistent with standard privacy laws and claimed no evidence of improper data sharing. However, the plaintiffs’ legal team viewed DOGE’s access as unprecedented.
Lee Saunders, President of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, celebrated the judge’s decision, considering it a “major win for working people and retirees.” Additionally, Skye Perryman, president of Democracy Forward, praised the court’s acknowledgment of the imminent risks and its intervention to halt DOGE’s activities.
Beyond the SSA, DOGE reportedly obtained access to databases in other federal departments, including the Treasury and the IRS. They arrived at the SSA shortly after Trump’s inauguration, aggressively seeking data system access that is typically well-guarded even within government circles. According to former SSA officials, the team’s search efforts were grounded in inaccuracies and misunderstandings.
Judge Hollander, nominated by President Barack Obama and based in Baltimore, is one among several judges evaluating cases related to DOGE. There have been nearly two dozen lawsuits against the team. Earlier this week, another Maryland judge ruled that DOGE’s actions regarding the dismantling of the United States Agency for International Development were likely unconstitutional. While some judges have expressed concerns about DOGE’s extensive cost-cutting measures, not all have deemed the risks pressing enough to ban the team from accessing government data systems.