WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday temporarily cleared the way for the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), a Trump administration task force, to access sensitive records held by the Social Security Administration (SSA), lifting a lower court injunction while legal proceedings continue.
In an unsigned order, the court granted the Biden administration’s emergency request to lift the injunction issued by a federal district judge in Maryland. That order had previously limited DOGE’s access to personally identifiable information contained in SSA databases. Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented from the decision.
“We conclude that, under the present circumstances, SSA may proceed to afford members of the SSA DOGE Team access to the agency records in question in order for those members to do their work,” the court wrote in its brief opinion.
The Supreme Court’s intervention marks the first time it has directly weighed in on a case involving DOGE, an initiative launched by President Donald Trump on his first day back in office. Initially led by Elon Musk before his departure from government service last week, DOGE is tasked with reducing the size and scope of the federal government. Its wide-reaching activities have sparked multiple legal challenges, particularly concerning the federal government’s handling of Americans’ private data.
The challenge before the high court was brought by two federal employee unions and an advocacy organization. The plaintiffs argued that the Social Security Administration unlawfully granted DOGE expansive access to databases containing Social Security numbers, medical histories, employment and education records, and financial information.
In April, U.S. District Judge Ellen Hollander found that the plaintiffs were likely to prevail on their claims that SSA’s decision violated the Privacy Act and the Administrative Procedure Act. Her ruling limited DOGE’s access to anonymized or redacted data and imposed conditions such as background checks and training requirements.
The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the injunction, prompting the Trump administration to seek emergency relief from the Supreme Court. In its appeal, the Justice Department argued that the injunction interfered with urgent federal priorities to eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse in government systems.
“The government cannot eliminate waste and fraud if district courts bar the very agency personnel with expertise and the designated mission of curtailing such waste and fraud from performing their jobs,” Solicitor General D. John Sauer wrote in the government’s filing.
He contended that SSA DOGE personnel, tasked with modernizing government systems, must have access to those very systems to fulfill their roles. “Yet the district court instead viewed agency employees within the SSA DOGE team as the equivalent of intruders who break into hotel rooms,” he said.
Attorneys for the plaintiffs countered that DOGE’s unfettered access to SSA databases marked a dramatic and unauthorized shift in agency policy. They alleged that the SSA had failed to consider the implications for the privacy of millions of Americans and the legal limits imposed by federal data protection laws.
“SSA granted unprecedented and sweeping access to the most sensitive information held by the government,” plaintiffs wrote in court filings. “It did so without acknowledging the sea change in their own practices and policies, without considering the reliance interests of millions of Americans, and without assessing the real-world risks posed by unauthorized DOGE Team access.”
The unions involved in the suit argued that their members’ harm deepens each day DOGE personnel have access to sensitive information. They emphasized that the constitutional right to privacy is at stake.
DOGE has been dispatched across numerous federal agencies as part of President Trump’s campaign to streamline government operations. In addition to SSA, the task force has sought access to records from the Departments of Treasury and Education, as well as the Office of Personnel Management, prompting similar legal challenges over compliance with the Privacy Act.
Before stepping down from his government post last week, Elon Musk was instrumental in shaping DOGE’s controversial strategies. Musk’s leadership is at the center of a separate lawsuit concerning the closure of the U.S. Agency for International Development. A federal judge in Maryland ruled in March that Musk and DOGE likely violated the Constitution’s Appointments Clause, a decision that has been paused pending appeal by the administration.
With the high court now allowing DOGE to proceed with full access to SSA systems, the ruling is expected to have wide-ranging implications for ongoing legal battles over data privacy, administrative law, and executive authority.
