Judge halts DOGE's union personal data grab at OPM, Treasury, Education
(2025/03/25)
- Reference: 1742933707
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2025/03/25/doge_cannot_access_pii/
- Source link:
A Maryland judge has dealt another blow to Elon Musk's cost-trimming DOGE unit, temporarily blocking the US Treasury, Dept of Education, and Office of Personnel Management from sharing union members' personal data with the billionaire's minions.
Federal district Judge Deborah Boardman issued a preliminary [1]injunction [PDF] Monday barring all three government organizations from disclosing the plaintiffs' personally identifiable information (PII) to the Trump-blessed DOGE team or any of its affiliates embedded within Uncle Sam.
In granting the injunction, Judge Boardman sided with the plaintiffs – the American Federation of Teachers and others – finding that Treasury, Education, and Office of Personnel Management (OPM) likely broke the Privacy Act, and by extension, ran afoul of the Administrative Procedure Act as well, by giving DOGE access to federal workers' info. [2]DOGE has been [3]running through central government looking for thousands of staff to cut, programs to ax, and contracts to cancel to save the White House some money.
[4]
"Enacted 50 years ago, the Privacy Act protects from unauthorized disclosure the massive amounts of personal information that the federal government collects from large swaths of the public," the judge wrote in a [5]memorandum [PDF] explaining her decision.
[6]
[7]
"Those concerns are just as salient today," Boardman continued. "No matter how important or urgent the President's DOGE agenda may be, federal agencies must execute it in accordance with the law. That likely did not happen in this case."
We can't help but recall another federal judge this month ordering deportation flights from the US be turned around, and the administration [8]just ignoring the ruling.
No matter how important or urgent the President's DOGE agenda may be, federal agencies must execute it in accordance with the law. That likely did not happen in this case
The Maryland complaint, filed by five unions and six military veterans in total, alleged that federal agencies granted Team DOGE access to their personal data without their knowledge or consent — a move they claimed ran roughshod over the above-mentioned acts.
The plaintiffs said this disclosure caused "major stress and anxiety," citing fears over who had accessed their data, potential future privacy breaches, and whether it could be "weaponized against them." Judge Boardman found the plaintiffs had shown a likely violation of federal privacy laws and a real risk of harm, warranting the injunction.
[9]
"[Plaintiffs] will suffer irreparable harm if the defendants are not enjoined; and that the balance of the equities and public interest weigh [in] favor of preliminary injunctive relief," the judge said. "This invasion of the plaintiffs' privacy and the intrusion upon their seclusion is neither speculative nor remote; it is actual and imminent. The plaintiffs have made a clear showing that they will experience irreparable harm without an injunction."
The ruling builds on a temporary restraining order Judge Boardman issued on February 24, which barred Dept of Education and OPM from disclosing the plaintiffs' data to DOGE affiliates. The March 24 injunction expands that order to include the Treasury Department and keeps all three agencies blocked from sharing plaintiffs' information as the case proceeds.
The government has already filed a notice of appeal and requested that Judge Boardman stay the injunction while the appeal is pending. She has not yet ruled on that request.
[10]
"The court re-affirmed that DOGE affiliates have not demonstrated a need to access Americans' highly sensitive and private data to do their jobs," [11]said Kristy Parker, Counsel at Protect Democracy, part of the cadre of lawyers working for the plaintiffs. "As we make our case in court, this ruling protects Americans' right to privacy from people who may not have appropriate authority to access it and who may not be using it properly or with adequate safeguards."
[12]Accenture: DOGE's federal procurement review is hurting our sales
[13]Dems ask federal agencies for reassurance DOGE isn't feeding data into AI willy-nilly
[14]Democrats demand to know WTF is up with that DOGE server on OPM's network
[15]Does DOGE have what it takes to actually tackle billions in US govt IT spending?
It's worth noting that the judge's order only covers the personal data of the plaintiffs. That means DOGE operatives may still have access to everyone else's PII — unless other lawsuits or agency decisions have imposed separate limits.
We've asked the legal team behind the suit whether a final decision in the case could be broader in scope, and haven't yet heard back.
Yesterday's decision is the latest legal setback for DOGE's cost-pruning agenda. More than 20 [16]lawsuits have been filed to stop Musk's march through the federal government. Notably, a federal judge has issued a preliminary injunction [17]limiting DOGE's access to certain Treasury systems. Additionally, the court has [18]mandated that DOGE comply with Freedom of Information Act requests.
None of the federal agencies named in the lawsuit responded to requests for comment. ®
Get our [19]Tech Resources
[1] https://regmedia.co.uk/2025/03/25/aft-v-bessent-order.pdf
[2] https://www.theregister.com/2025/02/07/opinion_column_musk/
[3] https://search.theregister.com/?q=doge&site=
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/publicsector&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2Z-M1iF6-MsYpXT5Ifr2oywAAAZU&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[5] https://regmedia.co.uk/2025/03/25/aft-v-bessent-decision.pdf
[6] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/publicsector&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44Z-M1iF6-MsYpXT5Ifr2oywAAAZU&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[7] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/publicsector&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33Z-M1iF6-MsYpXT5Ifr2oywAAAZU&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[8] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/crrdp9jdpyko
[9] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/publicsector&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44Z-M1iF6-MsYpXT5Ifr2oywAAAZU&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[10] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/publicsector&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33Z-M1iF6-MsYpXT5Ifr2oywAAAZU&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[11] https://protectdemocracy.org/work/federal-court-issues-order-stopping-doge-from-accessing-private-data/
[12] https://www.theregister.com/2025/03/21/accenture_warns_doges_federal_procurement/
[13] https://www.theregister.com/2025/03/13/democrat_letter_doge_ai_use/
[14] https://www.theregister.com/2025/02/06/democrats_opm_server/
[15] https://www.theregister.com/2025/02/08/doge_us_goverment_tech_spending/
[16] https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/us/trump-administration-lawsuits.html
[17] https://www.theregister.com/2025/02/06/federal_court_leashes_doges_tresury_access/
[18] https://www.citizensforethics.org/legal-action/lawsuits/crew-sues-us-doge-service-to-compel-transparency/
[19] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Federal district Judge Deborah Boardman issued a preliminary [1]injunction [PDF] Monday barring all three government organizations from disclosing the plaintiffs' personally identifiable information (PII) to the Trump-blessed DOGE team or any of its affiliates embedded within Uncle Sam.
In granting the injunction, Judge Boardman sided with the plaintiffs – the American Federation of Teachers and others – finding that Treasury, Education, and Office of Personnel Management (OPM) likely broke the Privacy Act, and by extension, ran afoul of the Administrative Procedure Act as well, by giving DOGE access to federal workers' info. [2]DOGE has been [3]running through central government looking for thousands of staff to cut, programs to ax, and contracts to cancel to save the White House some money.
[4]
"Enacted 50 years ago, the Privacy Act protects from unauthorized disclosure the massive amounts of personal information that the federal government collects from large swaths of the public," the judge wrote in a [5]memorandum [PDF] explaining her decision.
[6]
[7]
"Those concerns are just as salient today," Boardman continued. "No matter how important or urgent the President's DOGE agenda may be, federal agencies must execute it in accordance with the law. That likely did not happen in this case."
We can't help but recall another federal judge this month ordering deportation flights from the US be turned around, and the administration [8]just ignoring the ruling.
No matter how important or urgent the President's DOGE agenda may be, federal agencies must execute it in accordance with the law. That likely did not happen in this case
The Maryland complaint, filed by five unions and six military veterans in total, alleged that federal agencies granted Team DOGE access to their personal data without their knowledge or consent — a move they claimed ran roughshod over the above-mentioned acts.
The plaintiffs said this disclosure caused "major stress and anxiety," citing fears over who had accessed their data, potential future privacy breaches, and whether it could be "weaponized against them." Judge Boardman found the plaintiffs had shown a likely violation of federal privacy laws and a real risk of harm, warranting the injunction.
[9]
"[Plaintiffs] will suffer irreparable harm if the defendants are not enjoined; and that the balance of the equities and public interest weigh [in] favor of preliminary injunctive relief," the judge said. "This invasion of the plaintiffs' privacy and the intrusion upon their seclusion is neither speculative nor remote; it is actual and imminent. The plaintiffs have made a clear showing that they will experience irreparable harm without an injunction."
The ruling builds on a temporary restraining order Judge Boardman issued on February 24, which barred Dept of Education and OPM from disclosing the plaintiffs' data to DOGE affiliates. The March 24 injunction expands that order to include the Treasury Department and keeps all three agencies blocked from sharing plaintiffs' information as the case proceeds.
The government has already filed a notice of appeal and requested that Judge Boardman stay the injunction while the appeal is pending. She has not yet ruled on that request.
[10]
"The court re-affirmed that DOGE affiliates have not demonstrated a need to access Americans' highly sensitive and private data to do their jobs," [11]said Kristy Parker, Counsel at Protect Democracy, part of the cadre of lawyers working for the plaintiffs. "As we make our case in court, this ruling protects Americans' right to privacy from people who may not have appropriate authority to access it and who may not be using it properly or with adequate safeguards."
[12]Accenture: DOGE's federal procurement review is hurting our sales
[13]Dems ask federal agencies for reassurance DOGE isn't feeding data into AI willy-nilly
[14]Democrats demand to know WTF is up with that DOGE server on OPM's network
[15]Does DOGE have what it takes to actually tackle billions in US govt IT spending?
It's worth noting that the judge's order only covers the personal data of the plaintiffs. That means DOGE operatives may still have access to everyone else's PII — unless other lawsuits or agency decisions have imposed separate limits.
We've asked the legal team behind the suit whether a final decision in the case could be broader in scope, and haven't yet heard back.
Yesterday's decision is the latest legal setback for DOGE's cost-pruning agenda. More than 20 [16]lawsuits have been filed to stop Musk's march through the federal government. Notably, a federal judge has issued a preliminary injunction [17]limiting DOGE's access to certain Treasury systems. Additionally, the court has [18]mandated that DOGE comply with Freedom of Information Act requests.
None of the federal agencies named in the lawsuit responded to requests for comment. ®
Get our [19]Tech Resources
[1] https://regmedia.co.uk/2025/03/25/aft-v-bessent-order.pdf
[2] https://www.theregister.com/2025/02/07/opinion_column_musk/
[3] https://search.theregister.com/?q=doge&site=
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/publicsector&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2Z-M1iF6-MsYpXT5Ifr2oywAAAZU&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[5] https://regmedia.co.uk/2025/03/25/aft-v-bessent-decision.pdf
[6] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/publicsector&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44Z-M1iF6-MsYpXT5Ifr2oywAAAZU&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[7] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/publicsector&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33Z-M1iF6-MsYpXT5Ifr2oywAAAZU&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[8] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/crrdp9jdpyko
[9] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/publicsector&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44Z-M1iF6-MsYpXT5Ifr2oywAAAZU&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[10] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/publicsector&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33Z-M1iF6-MsYpXT5Ifr2oywAAAZU&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[11] https://protectdemocracy.org/work/federal-court-issues-order-stopping-doge-from-accessing-private-data/
[12] https://www.theregister.com/2025/03/21/accenture_warns_doges_federal_procurement/
[13] https://www.theregister.com/2025/03/13/democrat_letter_doge_ai_use/
[14] https://www.theregister.com/2025/02/06/democrats_opm_server/
[15] https://www.theregister.com/2025/02/08/doge_us_goverment_tech_spending/
[16] https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/us/trump-administration-lawsuits.html
[17] https://www.theregister.com/2025/02/06/federal_court_leashes_doges_tresury_access/
[18] https://www.citizensforethics.org/legal-action/lawsuits/crew-sues-us-doge-service-to-compel-transparency/
[19] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: I'm not sure that the "judicial" branch really understands that the data has long flown the
DS999
He's ordered that the data they've collected be destroyed or have the personal information removed, but yes there is no way for him or anyone else to verify that was actually done. But what is the alternative, throw up your hands and say "if you can do something illegal before the court has a chance to issue a ruling you can get away with it?"
Re: I'm not sure that the "judicial" branch really understands that the data has long flown the
Doctor Syntax
Not an alternative but an additional step. If the law has been broken prosecute those who did so. Having made examples of a few making it clear that anyone subsequently found in possession of the data will not only be prosecuted under the original offence, they will also be in contempt of court.
Unfortunately it's not likely to happen for the next 4 years.
Right to privacy from people who may not have appropriate authority
Anonymous Coward
Don't tell him, Pike!
Only for real - and he doesn't think he's kidding.
OPM data
Anonymous Coward
I heard more people have OPM data, just saying ...
I'm not sure that the "judicial" branch really understands that the data has long flown the coup.
The infiltration by the boy musk nerds to implant spyware and devices on the networks in the first few hours was completed early in this attack.
The exfiltration of data from the various databases and servers started right away. The end-points for this exfiltration will not return the data - even if they could be identified.
As the president of El Salvador said when planes landed with illegally exported people - ordered back by the US courts: "Oopsie, Too Late".
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/03/oopsie-too-late-el-salvador-president-mocks-judge/