US District Judge Ellen Hollander has issued a preliminary injunction regarding access to unedited data.
On April 17, the judge ruled in favor of unauthorized social security data by the government’s Office of Efficiency (DOGE) in opposition to union and retirees who sued the lawsuit.
The interim injunction of US District Judge Ellen Hollander allows the Social Security Agency (SSA) to allow Doge employees and special White House employee Elon Musk to access records that contain personally identifiable information, such as addresses. We also order Musk, Doge and Doge affiliates to remove all non-anonymized data they own from the Social Security System.
The injunction is set to remain in place as the lawsuit progresses, as there is no order from the Court of Appeal. Hollander previously entered a temporary suppression command using a similar language. The injunction will replace it.
In a memorandum explaining her decision, which took over hours after a hearing in federal court in Maryland, she said Doge’s purpose – addressing waste and fraud is “a commendable and perhaps something that the Americans probably praise and endorse.”
The incident, she said, is about how Doge works.
“For about 90 years, the SSA has been guided by the fundamental principles of privacy expectations regarding its records. This case exposes a wide crack within the foundation,” she writes.
The judge concluded that U.S., county, and local government employees and other plaintiffs are likely to succeed in claiming that Doge access to data that has not been stripped of SSA is voluntary, whimsical and violates federal law.
“The plaintiffs have demonstrated that members will cause irreparable harm in the absence of a provisional injunction, and stocks are in their favour, and provisional injunctions serve the public interest,” she wrote.
This order does not block Doge’s access to edited Social Security information.
The plaintiff’s lawyers had said in a predicted injunction motion that their members expected their data to be private. They said access to Doge violated a law called the Privacy Act. This is because the Doge team did not need to access information and access was not justified by the everyday use exceptions.
Government lawyers said Doge’s work involves making sure Doge’s work accurately reflects whether people are alive or dead, as part of a project ordered by President Donald Trump to improve government efficiency. They said eight individuals who were given access to personally identifiable data had background checks and training on a variety of topics, including ethics.
The lawyer said the access is within the exception outlined in a law called the Privacy Act.
“Privacy Act generally prohibits disclosure of subject records containing personal information without consent, but approves disclosure of such records to “officials and employees of agencies who maintain records that require records of performance of their duties,” they wrote simply. “Providing members of the SSA Doge team with access to agency records is categorized within that approval.”
The government has indicated it will appeal to the US Court of Appeals in the Fourth Circuit.
That court overturned a ruling from another judge in early April that prevented Doge from accessing records from two other agencies. Ministry of Education and Human Resources Bureau.
The majority of the appeals court panel said they presented evidence suggesting that the government would ultimately succeed in the case.
In another ruling this week, the third federal judge allowed the union to proceed with Doge’s lawsuit over access to the Department of Labor.
