A Federal court judge in Maryland handed down a decision on April 17 that restricts the White House’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) ability to access some types of citizen data held by the Social Security Administration (SSA), while a second judge in Washington, D.C., on April 16 cleared the way for plaintiffs to pursue action against DOGE and its work at several Federal agencies.
On Thursday, Judge Ellen Hollander of the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland issued a preliminary injunction to block DOGE from accessing certain data from SSA after a group of labor unions and retirees sued the Trump administration alleging that DOGE was violating privacy laws and creating information security risks by accessing that data.
Hollander had issued a temporary restraining order last month to block access to SSA data, but it was set to expire on April 17.
The preliminary injunction allows DOGE to access taxpayer data that’s been redacted or has had any personally identifiable information removed, as long as staffers doing that work undergo training and background checks.
The order also directs DOGE to delete all non-anonymized taxpayer data that they may have gained access to through SSA systems.
In issuing the injunction, Hollander said that the plaintiffs would likely succeed in their claim that DOGE had violated privacy laws in its work at SSA and had caused “irreparable harm.”
“The objective to address fraud, waste, mismanagement, and bloat is laudable, and one that the American public presumably applauds and supports,” wrote Hollander in her 148-page memorandum explaining the decision. “However, the issue here is not the work that DOGE or the Agency want to do. The issue is about how they want to do the work.”
“For some 90 years, SSA has been guided by the foundational principle of an expectation of privacy with respect to its records. This case exposes a wide fissure in the foundation,” she added.
In a separate order on Wednesday, Judge John D. Bates of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia gave the go-ahead to a coalition of labor unions and economic groups to file suit against DOGE’s work involving the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the departments of Labor and Health and Human Services.
The coalition said it is suing over what it alleges are violations of the Administrative Procedure Act – which governs how Federal agencies create and enforce rules – saying that the agencies unlawfully disclosed sensitive information to DOGE without consent.
“The American people deserve to know what is happening behind closed doors as Elon Musk and his DOGE staff hide in the shadows, create chaos and make decisions that dramatically affect the lives of millions of families,” Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, which is representing the coalition, said in a statement.
“We are pleased that the labor and economic organizations who are standing up for the rights of people and the rule of law will get to have their day in court as this case proceeds,” he continued.
This week’s court decisions follow a flurry of other decisions on DOGE’s legal ability to access Federal agencies’ data, which have brought mixed results.