The U.S. Supreme Court granted the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) broad and immediate access to the Social Security Administration’s (SSA) vast troves of sensitive personal data. The ruling, which came on the Court’s so-called “emergency docket,” temporarily lifts a lower court injunction that had sharply limited DOGE’s access to these records while ongoing litigation unfolds.

On his first day of his second term, President Trump signed an executive order establishing DOGE to root out waste and fraud across government agencies. DOGE, spearheaded by Elon Musk, was granted sweeping mandates to access agency records, including those held by the SSA.

DOGE’s push for “full and prompt access” to all unclassified SSA records, software, and IT systems quickly drew legal challenges. Two major labor unions, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) and the American Federation of Teachers, along with the Alliance for Retired Americans, filed suit, arguing that such access would violate the federal Privacy Act of 1974 and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).

U.S. District Judge Ellen Hollander in Maryland sided with the plaintiffs, issuing a preliminary injunction in April 2025 that blocked DOGE from accessing personally identifiable information (PII) in SSA databases, except under limited, tightly controlled circumstances. The judge found that the administration had failed to justify why DOGE required such broad access and concluded that most of DOGE’s stated goals could be achieved using anonymized or redacted data.

By a 6-3 vote, with the Court’s conservative majority in favor and its three liberal justices dissenting, the Supreme Court granted the government’s emergency request to stay the lower court’s injunction. The unsigned order allows DOGE personnel assigned to the SSA to access the agency’s records “in order for those members to do their work,” pending further proceedings in the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals and potential Supreme Court review.

The ruling means DOGE can now access Social Security numbers, medical and mental health records, financial and employment histories, and family court information for millions of Americans, without the interim safeguards previously imposed by the district court.

The modernization effort is not purely in-house; it is deeply intertwined with private sector actors, especially those with close ties to Elon Musk and Peter Thiel.  Many DOGE staffers are drawn from Musk’s companies (e.g., SpaceX, X/Twitter, Neuralink) and his broader network.

DOGE’s modernization projects frequently involve outside contractors. For example, Palantir, Peter Thiel’s company, is reportedly building a “master database” for DOGE, centralizing sensitive data from multiple agencies for uses such as immigration enforcement.

DOGE operates with fewer checks than typical federal agencies, sidestepping some privacy and transparency requirements that constrain both government bodies and private businesses.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, issued a forceful dissent. Jackson criticized the majority for granting “emergency” relief that, in her view, allows the government to “hand DOGE staffers the highly sensitive data of millions of Americans” before courts have had the chance to determine whether such access is lawful.

Jackson highlighted the risks to privacy, noting that the SSA’s databases contain not only Social Security numbers but also bank account details, medical histories, including sensitive conditions like HIV status, and other personal information. She argued that the government had failed to demonstrate any concrete or irreparable harm that would result from waiting for litigation to proceed, and warned that the decision “creates grave privacy risks for millions of Americans”.

The Supreme Court’s order is temporary, pending the outcome of the government’s appeal in the Fourth Circuit and any further Supreme Court review. Should the high court ultimately decline to take up the case, the stay will end; if it grants full review, the stay will remain in place until a final decision is issued.