The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Friday, June 6, 2025, that the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) can access sensitive personal information from the Social Security Administration (SSA), lifting a lower court injunction that had temporarily blocked such access.
The 6-3 decision immediately triggered nationwide concern among privacy advocates, unions, and lawmakers over what they describe as a potentially dangerous precedent for government data sharing.
This ruling stems from a lawsuit filed by two labor unions and a nonprofit advocacy group that had sought to prevent DOGE from obtaining unredacted SSA records about millions of Americans.
The plaintiffs argued that the move violated the Privacy Act of 1974, which protects individuals’ rights to privacy in records held by the federal government.
The Legal Fight
The Supreme Court’s decision resolves — at least for now — a dispute over whether DOGE could lawfully access full SSA records under a data-sharing agreement signed earlier this year. The plaintiffs — including the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) and National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU) — filed suit in federal court, alleging that the SSA’s agreement with DOGE violated the Privacy Act and put workers and beneficiaries at risk.
In March 2025, a district court judge issued a preliminary injunction, barring DOGE from accessing certain parts of the SSA’s database. The court found that DOGE had not demonstrated a clear legal right to the data and that the risk to individual privacy was significant. The Trump administration appealed directly to the Supreme Court.
In a 6-3 ruling along ideological lines, the Court’s conservative majority lifted the injunction, allowing DOGE to proceed with its data acquisition. The majority opinion did not resolve the constitutional or statutory questions definitively but emphasized that the lower court’s injunction was overly broad and premature.
What Kind of Data Is Involved?
The Social Security Administration maintains detailed records on more than 70 million Americans who receive retirement, disability, or survivor benefits. These records include Social Security numbers, earnings history, medical records, benefit payments, and even notes from interviews and internal fraud investigations.
Under the data-sharing agreement, DOGE will have access to some of this information — though it remains unclear how much will be redacted or restricted going forward. According to reporting from CNN, DOGE has requested full access to metadata, administrative case files, and real-time updates from SSA’s internal systems.
Critics say such access would give DOGE unprecedented insight into the lives of millions of Americans, including financial data, medical diagnoses, and personal identifiers — information that, if misused or leaked, could pose serious harm.
Dissent: “Unfettered Access” Without Accountability
The Court’s three liberal justices — Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson, Elena Kagan, and Sonia Sotomayor — dissented strongly. Justice Jackson, writing for the minority, said the ruling gave DOGE “unfettered access to deeply personal data without any assurance of legal entitlement or appropriate safeguards.”
The dissenters warned that the Court’s decision effectively allows an executive-created agency with no congressional mandate to bypass well-established privacy laws.
“There is no precedent for granting such sweeping access to sensitive records before the legal questions have been fully litigated,” Jackson wrote. “This Court’s decision short-circuits that process and exposes millions to unreviewed surveillance.”
DOGE’s Response and Next Steps
In a brief statement issued Friday, DOGE Acting Administrator Amy Gleason praised the ruling and said the agency would move forward with its planned review of SSA systems.
“Our mission is to protect taxpayer dollars, reduce fraud, and improve delivery of critical services. Today’s ruling empowers us to do just that,” she said.
The case now returns to lower courts, where litigation will continue over whether DOGE’s access is legal under the Privacy Act. But in the meantime, DOGE is free to analyze SSA data as it builds out its internal efficiency algorithms and monitoring systems.
Public Reaction and Political Fallout
The decision has drawn strong criticism from civil liberties organizations, Democratic lawmakers, and data privacy advocates. Democracy Forward, which is representing the plaintiffs in the ongoing case, said the ruling “sets a dangerous precedent for unchecked government surveillance.”
House Democrats vowed to introduce legislation that would explicitly bar DOGE or similar agencies from accessing sensitive federal records without congressional oversight.
Meanwhile, watchdog groups warned that DOGE’s activities may not be subject to the same transparency and accountability rules as traditional federal departments. Unlike the SSA, which is bound by public comment rules and inspector general review, DOGE was created by executive order and operates under different rules.
What This Means for You
For most Americans, the impact of the ruling may not be immediately visible. SSA benefits will continue to be processed as normal, and no public reports have suggested that DOGE will contact or audit individual beneficiaries.
However, the decision has broader implications for data privacy. If DOGE or similar entities can gain access to sensitive federal records with only limited legal review, it could open the door for expanded data sharing between agencies — including law enforcement, immigration authorities, or private contractors.
The ruling also highlights the limits of the Privacy Act in a digital age, where agencies can rapidly mine, analyze, and cross-reference data across platforms. The full consequences of this decision may not become clear for months or even years.
Final Word
The Supreme Court’s decision in the DOGE-SSA case is one of the most significant rulings on data privacy in a generation. It raises fundamental questions about how the federal government balances efficiency, accountability, and civil liberties.
As the case returns to lower courts and DOGE expands its reach, Americans are left to grapple with a new digital reality: one in which unelected agencies may have the power to comb through their most private data — with little notice and limited oversight.
MORE COVERAGE: Social Security | Supreme Court | DOGE
This content is brought to you by the FingerLakes1.com Team. Support our mission by visiting www.patreon.com/fl1 or learn how you send us your local content here.