US President Donald Trump continues to back his close ally, Elon Musk, and his team at the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). He now wants them to gain access to Social Security data of American citizens. On Friday, Trump’s administration asked the US Supreme Court to allow DOGE to view sensitive records from the Social Security Administration.
D. John Sauer, the solicitor general, submitted the plea as an “emergency application,” according to the court docket. He stated, “The application presents a now-familiar theme: a district court has issued sweeping injunctive relief without legal authority to do so, in ways that inflict ongoing, irreparable harm on urgent federal priorities and stymie the executive branch’s functions.”
Repeated Legal Push
Recently, the Trump administration has filed several emergency applications. These mostly defend Trump’s hardline immigration policies, including efforts to remove birthright citizenship. Some of these cases are still awaiting Supreme Court decisions. Additionally, on May 15, the justices will hear arguments about how far courts can go in blocking Trump’s push to end birthright citizenship.
Trump’s Conflict with Lower Courts
Trump and his supporters often express frustration with lower court judges. They accuse these judges of blocking many of his policies. In one such case, Judge Ellen L. Hollander of the US District Court in Maryland placed tough limits on access to Social Security data. She said the agency must uphold its “abiding commitment to the privacy and confidentiality of the personal information entrusted to it by the American people.”
However, she did offer a compromise. She said DOGE could access “redacted or anonymised data and records,” but only after its members completed training on privacy laws. In addition, she insisted they undergo background checks and meet other conditions before getting access.
Legal Setback for Trump’s Team
Meanwhile, the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied the administration’s request to pause Judge Hollander’s order. Following that, the Supreme Court told the challengers—including two labor unions and an advocacy group—to submit their response to the government’s request by May 12.
Both Sides Present Their Arguments
In court documents, Sauer claimed Judge Hollander, an Obama appointee, overstepped her authority. He wrote, “The district court is forcing the executive branch to stop employees charged with modernising government information systems from accessing the data in those systems because, in the court’s judgment, those employees do not ‘need’ such access.”
He also argued, “The government cannot eliminate waste and fraud if district courts bar the very agency personnel with expertise and the designated mission of curtailing such waste and fraud from performing their jobs.”
Concerns Over Privacy and Immigration Policy
On the other hand, some legal experts fear that the Trump administration may use this data to further crack down on immigrants. Judge Hollander echoed these concerns. She wrote, “Intrusion into the personal affairs of millions of Americans — absent an adequate explanation for the need to do so — is not in the public interest,” especially because the agency “has long communicated to the public its commitment to privacy.”
Sauer disagreed. He told the Supreme Court that Judge Hollander had no right to interfere with the executive branch. “The district court’s flawed injunction,” he wrote, “forecloses the executive branch from carrying out the pressing priorities of modernizing government information systems and ferreting out fraud, waste, and abuse — all at the behest of plaintiffs who gave their information to the agencies with the knowledge that other government employees may access their data.”
What Happens Next?
Now, all eyes are on the US Supreme Court. It remains to be seen whether the justices will side with Trump and allow DOGE access—or stand by the lower court’s decision to protect Americans’ privacy.
