NEW YORK — A federal judge in New York has issued a preliminary injunction early Saturday, halting Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from gaining access to certain U.S. Treasury Department documents that contain highly sensitive personal information, including millions of Americans’ Social Security and bank account numbers. The decision came after a coalition of 19 Democratic state attorneys general brought a lawsuit against the Trump administration, claiming unauthorized access was granted to Musk’s team in violation of multiple federal statutes.
U.S. District Judge Paul A. Engelmayer’s ruling underscores growing concerns about privacy and cybersecurity risks tied to the administration’s decision. The attorneys general from states including Arizona, California, Connecticut, and others argue that this move infringes on the Privacy Act of 1974 and the Tax Reform Act of 1976, among other regulations.
The lawsuit pinpointed that historically, only a select group of career civil servants with the requisite security clearances could access the BFS payment systems, a protocol changed under the new policy initiated on February 2nd. At President Donald Trump’s behest, alongside Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, the policy now permits politically appointed special government employees and others broadened entry to these systems, a move yet to be thoroughly justified according to state officials.
These Treasury records are part of the Bureau of the Fiscal Services (BFS), which handles the dispersal of massive federal payments including Social Security disbursements and federal salaries. According to the lawsuit, this sort of expanded access could lead to potential misuse or unauthorized disclosure of private and sensitive information.
Amid these allegations, the Treasury Department has defended its position, stating that DOGE has only “read-only” access which does not extend to the modification or management of expenditures. This stance was detailed in a letter from a department official to Congress just this past Wednesday, trying to mitigate concerns over the procedural amendments.
Elon Musk, categorized as a special government employee, has been at the heart of this controversy. Critics argue that providing such extensive access to someone without traditional qualifications for handling sensitive financial data could be perilous. “As the richest man in the world, Elon Musk is not used to being told ‘no,’ but in our country, no one is above the law,” said one of the plaintiffs before the court ruling.
The legal challenge highlights a significant pushback from various state governments against what they perceive as an overreach by the federal executive power, emphasizing the necessity to uphold stringent data protection laws to safeguard citizens’ personal information against potential cybersecurity threats.
The outcome of this injunction could set a precedent for how personal information is accessed within government agencies and underscores ongoing debates around data privacy, government transparency, and the roles of political appointees in accessing potentially sensitive information.
While the administration has not yet publicly responded to the injunction, this legal battle underscores the tensions between state and federal jurisdictions over privacy, governance, and the proper scope of executive power in managing government resources and sensitive data.
This article has been automatically written by OpenAI. The people, facts, circumstances, and story may be inaccurate. Any concerns about content or requests for removal, retraction, or correction should be directed to [email protected].