The U.S. Supreme Court just gave a controversial agency the green light to access sensitive Social Security data — and privacy advocates are sounding the alarm.
In a brief, unsigned order issued Friday, June 6, 2025, the court said that the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) “may proceed” with obtaining records from the Social Security Administration, according to The New York Times.
The order marks a significant win for DOGE, a government division created by President Trump and initially led by Elon Musk during his brief but turbulent stint in Washington.
Although Musk left his post in May — and is now publicly feuding with President Trump — his imprint on federal operations remains.
The New York Times noted that Musk’s team moved aggressively through agencies earlier in the administration, firing staff and triggering a wave of lawsuits. The stated mission was to slash government spending and modernize bureaucracies. The reality was lawsuits, backlash, and now unprecedented access to deeply personal data.
This may be a good time to review your Social Security earnings history for accuracy. You can do this by logging into SSA.gov. Mistakes in your earnings record can reduce your future benefits — and correcting them early is important.
Privacy concerns and legal challenges
Two labor unions and an advocacy group sued to block DOGE from receiving Social Security data, arguing the information is protected under federal privacy laws. The groups, represented by Democracy Forward Foundation, said the government failed to demonstrate a lawful basis for such sweeping access, The New York Times reported.
Despite those concerns, the Supreme Court sided with the Trump administration’s position that DOGE needs the data to root out fraud and improve government efficiency.
In a second unsigned order, the court also ruled DOGE doesn’t have to turn over its internal documents in response to a transparency lawsuit — at least for now. That lawsuit aimed to reveal how the agency was using its power and handling sensitive information. The court’s decision delays that disclosure, again benefiting DOGE.
If you’re uneasy about how your data may be used, consider enabling two-factor authentication on government accounts and monitoring your credit reports regularly. Placing a freeze on your credit reports can help prevent identity thieves from opening new accounts in your name. It doesn’t affect your existing credit or ability to use your current credit cards.
Who dissented?
The court’s three liberal justices — Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson — dissented from both decisions, according to The New York Times.
The orders were issued through the court’s emergency docket without written opinions or detailed reasoning.
Why it matters to you
The Social Security Administration holds a vast trove of personal information, including earnings history, medical records, and benefit eligibility. While the Trump administration claims the data will be used to modernize the system, critics argue there’s little oversight — and a lot of room for misuse.
These rulings don’t just set legal precedent. They create real-world risks: data exposure, lack of transparency, and questions about who controls your most sensitive information.
The New York Times notes that these cases highlight unresolved tensions between privacy, executive power, and accountability — especially when a controversial agency like DOGE is involved.
Policy changes and agency access battles might seem distant, but they can affect how you in many ways — including how your Social Security benefits are calculated, how quickly you can resolve identity theft, or whether your personal data is used in government algorithms without your knowledge.
Staying engaged with your financial records and understanding your rights helps protect your future income.
Add a Comment