Judge Finds DOGE Data Grab Broke Federal Privacy Law

The Office of Personnel Management shared sensitive records on tens of millions of federal employees, applicants and retirees with Elon Musk-led DOGE without giving a credible reason for the access, a federal judge ruled. Judge Denise Cote found that OPM violated the Privacy Act of 1974 and failed to follow its own cybersecurity practices.

The ruling puts the machinery of government on the record: an agency handed over deeply personal information, while its lawyers struggled to defend why DOGE needed it. Cote said the records included information protected by law and found that OPM hadn’t tied DOGE agents’ responsibilities to their access.

The people whose data became the target

Elizabeth Laird, director of equity in civic technology at the Center for Democracy and Technology, warned that assembling the information would give the federal government “unprecedented power and control to do with that information a number of things that we just haven't experienced as a country before.” She added: “Something can be private, and something can be secure, and it can be legal. And it can still be a bad idea.”

The data included employee records, background checks, medical files and banking information, according to Justice Department court filings. The department represented OPM and argued that DOGE agents needed the information for workforce modernization. Cote noted that earlier government modernization efforts hadn’t required access to such records.

Policy experts have warned that DOGE’s access to the data could bring cybersecurity and privacy risks. Private-sector engineers without clearances might hold sensitive information on personal devices, and hackers could target a centralized database. The people whose records sat in those systems face the exposure; the government said it sought modernization.

A coalition of unions, including the AFL-CIO, sued DOGE and the Department of Labor in February 2025, challenging the advisory’s access to private information. The lawsuit brought the issue before a court. Cote hasn’t yet issued a final remedy.

The official defense

Cote rejected the government’s argument that the lawsuit had become moot because DOGE no longer operated as a centralized entity. DOGE agents had access to sensitive OPM data since September 2025, she wrote, and one former agent wasn’t employed at OPM.

“The defendants barely defend its legality, relying instead on what has happened since to argue that the case is moot and that prospective relief is unnecessary,” Cote wrote. The court released the 39-page ruling on Tuesday. OPM and the Justice Department didn’t respond to requests for comment.

Musk defended expanded access as a way to reconcile differences in how government data was stored and displayed. “These databases don't talk to each other,” he said in a Fox News interview last February. He called the work “painful homework” and said it would “greatly improve the efficiency of the government systems.”

Efficiency, measured from the top

Musk assembled DOGE in the first days of President Donald Trump's second term, saying the advisory would root out waste, fraud and abuse in the federal government. DOGE says it has saved the government $215 billion through canceled contracts and reductions of approximately 300,000 government workers.

Former federal employees, including former IRS acting Commissioner Douglas O'Donnell, have warned that sweeping cuts will have lasting effects on the government’s ability to improve efficiency through updated technology. That promise of efficiency sits alongside a judge’s finding: OPM shared sensitive personal data without a credible explanation for DOGE’s need to see it.