Lawsuits Trying to Stop DOGE Access to Personal Data: Explained

The Trump administration faces at least a dozen lawsuits that ask judges to halt what plaintiffs call unprecedented access to the data of private citizens emanating from the disruption of federal agencies.

“This is incredibly uncharted territory in terms of having an outside agency that hasn’t been confirmed yet trying to force their way into these agencies to get unfettered access to the personal information and financial information of American citizens,” said Ron De Jesus, field chief privacy officer at Transcend, a data privacy company. “It’s something that I don’t think the Privacy Act, or the E-Government Act, or any of these kind of privacy rules and regulations that federal agencies are subject to, actually really considered.”

Here is an overview of the data-access cases filed against the government as of Feb. 19.

Who Is Suing?

Consumer groups, federal workers and their unions, the attorneys general in 19 states, and students have all sued since Feb. 3.

Most of the suits target Elon Musk, White House cost-cutting effort the Department of Government Efficiency, the Office of Personnel Management and its new director, Russell Vought, as well as the Treasury Department and its secretary, Scott Bessent.

Initial litigation followed DOGE moving into several agencies, made public through reporting, leaks, and DOGE members’ own social media posts boasting about gaining access to government data.

Musk and DOGE are named in a few complaints, while President Donald Trump is a defendant in the case brought by the attorneys general of 19 blue states.

What Are the Legal Claims?

Most complaints cite the Privacy Act of 1974, which generally prohibits disclosure of information from federal systems of records without consent.

The Privacy Act doesn’t normally allow plaintiffs to seek injunctive relief, which is why it’s been paired with other regulatory tools, including the Administrative Procedure Act, to ask judges to block disclosures to DOGE.

A few of the suits also allege violations of other data protection and security laws such as the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and the Federal Information Security Management Act. Suits also cite the Internal Revenue Code, Confidential Information Protection and Statistical Efficiency Act, the Education Department’s privacy statute, the E-Government Act of 2002, the Tax Reform Act of 1976, the separation of powers doctrine, the US Constitution’s take care clause, and the legal concept of ultra vires—that the Trump administration is acting beyond the scope of its powers.

What’s the Government’s Defense?

The administration denies its activities constitute a data breach or that DOGE is jeopardizing sensitive information. It is largely relying on the argument that plaintiffs lack standing to sue the government—but also that halting DOGE would be “impermissibly intruding into the President’s superintendence of these agencies.”

What Are the Suits Seeking?

Most ask judges to stop DOGE from continuing to access agencies’ data, and to prevent it from using such data.

Plaintiffs also asked judges to prevent the group from using or modifying the data it’s obtained. They urge courts to require the deletion of any data obtained from agencies.

What’s still unclear is what, if any, remediation the courts could offer plaintiffs—beyond ceasing the data sharing—should it find the administration in violation of the law.

What’s the Latest?

On Tuesday, a federal judge in Washington denied a group of California students an emergency motion for a temporary restraining order to prevent the Education Department from turning over records to DOGE. Also on Tuesday a separate federal judge, Obama appointee Tanya Chutkan, rejected a temporary restraining order sought by Democratic state attorneys general to block DOGE from accessing internal systems and removing employees. She said, however, the plaintiffs raised legitimate concerns.

Plaintiffs have won temporary stays on DOGE access to systems in only two cases. As of Wednesday, three temporary restraining orders had been denied, one had been denied in part, and eight of the cases had been heard. All 12 cases are proceeding.

The Cases So Far

As of Feb. 19, at least 12 cases had been filed against the Trump administration claiming illegal access to the data of federal workers and other Americans. (The administration faces dozens of other suits on issues ranging from immigration to diversity, equity, and inclusion that are not reflected here). The data-access cases are:

• New Mexico v. Musk; seeks to block Elon Musk’s access to government data systems; temporary restraining order denied Feb. 18; US District Court for the District of Columbia.
• Alliance for Retired Americans v. Bessent; seeks injunctive relief to protect privacy of individuals whose data is held by the Treasury Department; hearing set for Feb. 24; US District Court for the District of Columbia.
• Center for Taxpayer Rights v. Internal Revenue Service; seeks to block DOGE from IRS access; assigned; US District Court for the District of Columbia.
• American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations v. Department of Labor; seeks to block DOGE from Labor Department records; temporary restraining order denied and preliminary-injunction briefing to be scheduled; US District Court for the District of Columbia.
• University of California Student Association v. Carter; seeks to block DOGE access to Education Department files; temporary restraining order denied Feb. 17; US District Court for the District of Columbia.
• State of New York v. Trump; seeks to block DOGE access to Treasury systems; temporary restraining order granted in part and denied in part on Feb. 11; US District Court for the Southern District of New York.
• National Treasury Employees Union v. Vought; seeks to enjoin the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau from granting access and disclosing employee records to DOGE; case assigned Feb. 11; US District Court for the District of Columbia.
• American Federation of Teachers v. Bessent; seeks to block DOGE access to Education and Treasury departments’ data; temporary restraining order hearing Feb. 19; US District Court for the District of Maryland.
• Electronic Privacy Information Center v. US Office of Personnel Management; seeks to block DOGE access to Treasury payment systems; temporary restraining order hearing scheduled Feb. 21; US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia.
• American Federation of Government Employees v. US Office of Personnel Management; seeks to stop DOGE access to Office of Personnel Management systems; case reassigned Feb. 13; US District Court for the Southern District of New York.
• Nemeth-Greenleaf v. US Office of Personnel Management; seeks to block OPM and Treasury from sharing government contractor data with DOGE; case assigned Feb. 12; US District Court for the District of Columbia.
• Gribbon v. Musk; seeks to block DOGE from accessing Treasury records; case assigned Feb. 13; US District Court for the District of Columbia.