On Monday, two labor unions, along with a grassroots advocacy organization, submitted a plea to the U.S. Supreme Court, urging the justices to uphold a federal judge’s temporary order. This order restricts personnel from the new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from accessing sensitive records held by the Social Security Administration (SSA).

Background of the Case

DOGE, created by President Donald Trump in January, is not a cabinet-level department but is tasked with modernizing government operations to minimize waste and fraud. Following the SSA’s decision to grant DOGE access to its data systems, the unions sought judicial intervention in federal court in Baltimore, Maryland.

Judicial Interventions

Senior U.S. District Judge Ellen Lipton Hollander issued a ruling that provisionally prohibits DOGE members from obtaining SSA records during the ongoing litigation. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit upheld this order, rejecting the government’s plea to suspend Hollander’s directive.

Government’s Position

On May 2, the Trump administration escalated the matter to the Supreme Court. Solicitor General D. John Sauer contended that the order imposed by Hollander constitutes a considerable hindrance to the President’s primary policy objectives. He argued that the challengers lack legal standing, asserting they cannot demonstrate any harm to their members resulting from the actions they contest.

Counterarguments from Labor Groups

The unions argued that Hollander’s order is merely a “limited” measure designed to maintain the current state of affairs and protect the public’s sensitive information as the litigation proceeds. They emphasized that the government failed to justify the need for unrestricted access by DOGE personnel, particularly those who have not completed the requisite training and background checks. The groups highlighted that, once this training is fulfilled, access could still be granted without compromising data security.

Potential Consequences of Data Breach

According to the advocacy organizations, if Hollander’s order were revoked, their members would experience irreparable harm. The SSA manages some of the most sensitive data within government records, including extensive medical, mental health, and family information. The unions stressed that compensating for any privacy violations would be challenging, as the core issue lies within the privacy invasion itself.