Trump Administration Asks Supreme Court to Allow DOGE Access to Social Security Records

In yet another example of how activist judges and left-wing bureaucrats are obstructing meaningful government reform, the Trump administration is locked in a high-stakes legal battle over its effort to modernize and streamline the federal bureaucracy. At the heart of this case is the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), a Trump-era initiative designed to root out waste, fraud, and abuse—particularly in bloated federal agencies like the Social Security Administration (SSA). But as expected, liberal courts are standing in the way of transparency and accountability.

The controversy centers on Executive Order 14158, issued by President Donald J. Trump on January 20, which established DOGE as a task force to recommend cost-cutting and modernization strategies for various federal agencies. It’s part of President Trump’s broader America First vision: trim the fat, hold government accountable, and deliver real results for taxpayers—not bloated budgets for entrenched federal workers.

In response to DOGE’s mission to audit inefficiencies and track down potential abuse, activist Judge Ellen Lipton Hollander from Maryland issued a temporary restraining order that later turned into a full preliminary injunction on April 17. Her ruling blocks DOGE from accessing vital SSA data—data that could reveal years of mismanagement, improper payments, and possibly even fraudulent activity. The judge, siding with labor unions and left-wing legal groups, claimed that DOGE’s legally authorized review somehow violated the Privacy Act—a claim that legal experts aligned with the Trump administration have called a gross overreach.

Solicitor General D. John Sauer, representing the administration, isn’t backing down. He has filed an emergency appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, urging it to lift the misguided lower court rulings that are undermining the president’s constitutional authority to run the Executive Branch. According to Sauer, the courts are now “acting like a human resources department for the White House,” trying to micromanage who the president can appoint and what data executive staff can access.

Let’s be clear: DOGE was not created to violate privacy—it was created to stop the waste, fraud, and political abuse that has long plagued federal agencies. The Trump administration is working to clean house, and it’s no surprise that entrenched D.C. insiders, union bosses, and Biden-era holdovers are panicking.

The lawsuit against DOGE, initiated by the far-left Democracy Forward Foundation on behalf of labor unions and a group of federal retirees, alleges that DOGE is on a “fishing expedition.” But in reality, this is a targeted, lawful effort to review how the SSA is handling taxpayer dollars. The SSA has been cited numerous times for making billions in improper payments—a fact that Democrats and their media allies routinely ignore.

Judge Hollander’s ruling is particularly alarming because it orders DOGE to delete already accessed data—including records that could be critical for identifying corruption and inefficiencies. The court even tried to dictate which DOGE team members could access certain data, what kind of training they must have, and what type of background checks are required—all decisions that constitutionally fall under the authority of the Executive Branch, not unelected judges.

After the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Hollander’s injunction in a narrow 9–6 vote, the Trump administration escalated the fight to the highest court in the land. The administration’s emergency application filed on May 2 asks the Supreme Court to reverse this judicial overreach and restore the Executive Branch’s rightful authority to clean up the government.

According to Sauer’s latest brief, the lower courts are inflicting real damage by tying the administration’s hands and preventing it from accessing data that is lawfully available under federal statutes. He notes that the SSA’s long history of operational failures, data inaccuracies, and financial mismanagement makes it a top priority for review. Without access to real-time data, the DOGE team cannot do its job—a job that President Trump was elected to do by millions of Americans who demanded a more accountable government.

Of course, the usual suspects are crying foul. The American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)—a powerful public sector union with deep Democrat ties—is claiming that DOGE’s efforts are dangerous and unwarranted. They argue that the team lacks a “demonstrated need” for the data, despite the fact that this is exactly the kind of oversight that unions and entrenched bureaucrats fear the most.

The real issue here isn’t about privacy—it’s about power. Liberal special interest groups are terrified that if Trump’s efficiency task force is allowed to proceed, it will expose the rot that has been hiding in plain sight for years. They’re afraid of losing control over federal agencies that have become slush funds for political agendas and job protection schemes for underperforming employees.

This case is about more than data access—it’s about whether a duly elected president can implement reform without being blocked at every turn by activist judges and lawfare-driven opposition. If the Supreme Court allows this injunction to stand, it will set a dangerous precedent, giving unelected judges the power to veto executive efforts to hold government accountable.

President Trump has made it clear: government exists to serve the people, not to serve itself. His creation of DOGE is a direct response to decades of bloated spending, corruption, and inefficiency—issues that the Washington swamp has no interest in solving. The DOJ is right to fight this battle, and the Supreme Court must act to protect the president’s authority and the will of the American people.

The decision now lies with the Supreme Court. Will it side with common sense, accountability, and constitutional executive power? Or will it bow to the radical demands of activist judges and government unions determined to protect their turf at any cost?

The Trump administration remains steadfast. As always, President Trump is putting the American taxpayer first. And no matter how hard the swamp pushes back, reform is coming—and the era of unchecked government waste is coming to an end.