Skip to content
General-news — Business — Health — Mental health — Appellate — Justice — Court — Government — Musk — Hollander — Medical — Law — Disability — Education — Politics — Anonymized

Contemporary Governmental Affairs |

Restrictions on Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency's access to Social Security systems with personal data of millions of Americans remain in place, according to a ruling by a federal appeals court.

,   and  ASMedia
3 min read

Contemporary Governmental Affairs |

Article Revamp:

Flattening Privacy Barriers: The Social Security Data Saga

By REBECCA BOONE, Associated Press

The battle over Social Security data access has taken another twist. Following a preliminary injunction issued by U.S. District Judge Ellen Hollander, Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) faces ongoing legal restrictions regarding their access to sensitive personal data on millions of Americans.

A full appellate court panel, hailing from the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, voted 9-6 to uphold Hollander's ruling while DOGE pursues an appeal. Released on Wednesday, the appellate court's decision has kept the brakes on DOGE's plans to delve deeper into the intricate web of Social Security data.

Earlier this month, Hollander imposed the preliminary injunction in an ongoing case where labor unions and retirees alleged DOGE's actions breached privacy laws and posed immense information security risks.

The injunction allows DOGE to peruse redacted or anonymized data, but only if staff attend mandatory training and background checks. Additionally, DOGE and its employees must expunge any non-anonymized Social Security data already obtained, and they're barred from making alterations to the Social Security Administration's computer code.

DOGE's attorneys argued that anonymizing the data would prove too cumbersome and hamper the Trump administration's mission to root out Social Security fraud.

Appellate Judge Robert B. King, speaking for the majority, slammed DOGE's eagerness for "unfettered access" to Social Security records—which house highly sensitive data such as personal family records, medical records of disability recipients, and bank and earning information. King stated that Americans had entrusted this information to the Social Security Administration with the hope it would be meticulously safeguarded.

Julius Richardson, an appellate judge who voted against the majority, contended the case should have been handled by a smaller three-judge panel rather than the full panel of active appellate judges. Richardson also expressed concerns over the plaintiffs' accusations of "abstract harm," claiming they have yet to demonstrate that DOGE has actually breached their personal information.

Despite this setback, the legal tussle between privacy, data security, and government oversight rumbles on, keeping millions of citizens on tenterhooks.

Enrichment Data Snippets:

  • Privacy advocates fret DOGE's access to the sensitive data Put tens of millions of Americans' private information (e.g., citizenship status, Social Security numbers) at risk, exposing them to potential identity theft and unauthorized surveillance.
  • Politically-motivated data manipulation: Undocumented immigrants contribute more to the Social Security system than they withdraw, yet DOGE, led by Musk, has allegedly targeted them, leveraging data to advance specific narratives.
  • Security gaps: A broader access to sensitive federal databases could create systemic vulnerabilities, risking breaches and compromising the integrity of these systems.
  1. The government department led by Elon Musk, the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), is confronted with ongoing legal restrictions in the realm of politics, specifically in accessing sensitive personal data of millions of Americans.
  2. The politics surrounding the Social Security data saga took a turn when a full appellate court panel, from the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, voted to uphold the preliminary injunction issued by Judge Ellen Hollander.
  3. The appellate court's decision prevents Elon Musk's DOGE from delving deeper into the complex web of Social Security data, per the ruling.
  4. In an ongoing case, labor unions and retirees alleged that DOGE's actions breached privacy laws and posed significant information security risks.
  5. Hollander's preliminary injunction allows DOGE to work with redacted or anonymized data, subject to mandatory training, background checks, and data erasure of non-anonymized data already obtained.
  6. DOGE's attorneys argued that anonymizing the data would obstruct the Trump administration's efforts to root out Social Security fraud.
  7. The appellate court, in its decision, criticized DOGE's push for "unfettered access" to Social Security records, which contain information such as personal family records, medical records of disability recipients, and bank and earning information.
  8. Appellate Judge Robert B. King, speaking for the majority, emphasized that Americans trust the Social Security Administration to protect their data meticulously.
  9. Judge Julius Richardson, who voted against the majority, suggested that the case should have been handled by a smaller three-judge panel and questioned the plaintiffs' claims of "abstract harm," asserting they have yet to prove that DOGE has breached their personal information.
Access to Social Security systems with personal data of millions of Americans remains restricted for Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency, as a federal appeals court declines to remove the constraints.

Read also:

Related

Latest