A federal judge has placed new limits on Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), restricting its access to Social Security systems that contain sensitive personal information about millions of Americans. This decision came from US District Judge Ellen Hollander, who issued a preliminary injunction after labor unions and retirees raised concerns about potential violations of privacy laws and the security risks posed by DOGE’s actions.
Previously, Judge Hollander had issued a temporary restraining order. Under the new injunction, DOGE staff can only access data that has been anonymized or stripped of personal identifiers, and only after completing training and background checks. Additionally, any non-anonymized Social Security data collected since January 20 must be deleted. The judge also prohibited DOGE from altering any software or code related to the Social Security Administration (SSA) and from sharing any such code with others.
Hollander acknowledged the importance of addressing issues like fraud and waste in government but emphasized that the methods DOGE proposed raised serious privacy concerns. She highlighted the long-standing expectation of privacy surrounding Social Security records, stating that the case revealed significant flaws in how DOGE intended to handle sensitive information.
During a court hearing, Hollander questioned why DOGE required extensive access to sensitive personal data to combat Social Security fraud. She suggested that much of the data could be anonymized in the early stages of analysis. The Justice Department argued that while anonymization is possible, it would complicate their processes.
Attorneys representing the plaintiffs described DOGE’s access as unprecedented and a drastic shift in how the SSA manages sensitive data, including medical and mental health records. They argued that this level of access could harm Social Security recipients and create an atmosphere of unease.
Protests against DOGE’s actions took place outside the courthouse, with union members and retirees voicing their concerns about the future of Social Security benefits. The situation surrounding the SSA has been tumultuous, particularly since President Trump’s second term began. The agency’s acting commissioner recently resigned after refusing to grant DOGE the access it sought.
Hollander made it clear that her order does not affect SSA workers who are not connected to DOGE, allowing them to continue their regular work. She also noted that DOGE staff must follow the same training and background check protocols as other SSA employees to access anonymized data.
The political backdrop of this case is complex, with recent actions by the administration raising eyebrows. The judge expressed frustration when a government attorney suggested her inquiries were veering into policy disagreements, asserting her role was to understand the implications of DOGE’s access.
This injunction could be appealed, and the case highlights ongoing tensions between privacy rights and government efficiency efforts. As the situation unfolds, the implications for Social Security recipients and the handling of their data remain a significant concern.