Over a dozen lawsuits to stop DOGE data access are betting on a 1974 law

Summary

Over a Dozen Lawsuits Challenge DOGE’s Access to Personal Data

Podcast: Consider This from NPR
Host: Ailsa Chang
Episode Title: Over a dozen lawsuits to stop DOGE data access are betting on a 1974 law
Release Date: March 13, 2025

---

Introduction: The Rise of DOGE and Data Concerns

In the March 13, 2025 episode of Consider This, Ailsa Chang delves into the contentious efforts of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), an agency established under President Trump. DOGE has been at the center of controversy not only for its significant staff reductions across federal agencies but also for its aggressive pursuit of access to vast amounts of personal data held by the U.S. government.

Chang opens the discussion by highlighting the types of sensitive information DOGE seeks, emphasizing the potential risks associated with such access.

Ailsa Chang [00:00]: “Date of birth, home address, Social Security number. I mean, these are just a few examples of some of the personal information that the US Government collects on most of us and stores in databases across federal agencies.”

The Scope of Personal Data Accessed by DOGE

Elizabeth Lair, director of the Equity and Civic Technology Project at the Center for Democracy and Technology, provides an in-depth analysis of the breadth and sensitivity of the data DOGE is aiming to access.

Elizabeth Lair [00:35]: “The level of sensitivity of the information that we're talking about is really unprecedented, and it is the most sensitive information that people provide about themselves.”

Lair explains that DOGE's access isn't limited to basic identifiers but extends to comprehensive demographic details, financial records, and even personal life events such as marriages, divorces, and medical conditions.

Elizabeth Lair [00:51]: “It will include demographics about you, so your race, your sex, even if you have a disability... major life events that you've had. So whether you were pregnant and gave birth to a child or you adopted a child or you got married or divorced... things that maybe your closest friends and family don't even know are included in these systems.”

Implications for Veterans and Sensitive Health Data

Jonathan Cummins, a seasoned software engineer and cybersecurity expert with over 30 years of experience, sheds light on the specific concerns related to veterans' data housed within the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).

Jonathan Cummins [02:05]: “If you are a veteran that's getting medical care from VA, your medical data is stored in VA databases... therapy notes... opioid addiction information...”

Cummins, who was recently dismissed from the US Digital Service along with 40 others, voices his apprehension about DOGE's potential access to highly sensitive medical and financial information stored by agencies like Medicare, Medicaid, and the VA.

Legal Battle: Invoking the Privacy Act of 1974

The core of the episode revolves around the legal challenges mounting against DOGE’s data access efforts. More than a dozen lawsuits have been filed, leveraging the Privacy Act of 1974 as their primary legal foundation.

Chang introduces Danielle Citron, a law professor at the University of Virginia, to provide historical context and analyze the relevance of the Privacy Act in the current scenario.

Ailsa Chang [05:15]: “Before we talk about these lawsuits, can you just take us back to the mid-1970s? How did the Privacy Act of 1974 even come about?”

Danielle Citron [05:27]: “...the National Crime Information center had an incredible amount of sensitive information... files were being shared across agencies without any safeguards... there was heated agreement across the aisle that we worried that it gave government a lot of power, excessive power that could control us.”

Citron elaborates on how the Privacy Act was designed to curb governmental overreach in data handling, ensuring that personal information is collected and used strictly for legitimate purposes with appropriate safeguards.

Current Lawsuits and Their Arguments

The lawsuits challenging DOGE’s data access are spearheaded by privacy groups and legal representatives advocating for both government employees and individuals whose data is at risk.

Danielle Citron [07:41]: “Privacy groups and attorneys are representing employees of the government and individuals whose data is collected in these systems of records that are protected by the Privacy Act... they're arguing that there's real harm here. They're losing their jobs...”

The plaintiffs assert that DOGE's access to personal data violates the Privacy Act's stipulations, which mandate that data provided to federal agencies must be used solely for its intended purpose and not exploited beyond those confines.

Danielle Citron [07:41]: “...we need to figure out in discovery if the loss of those jobs have to do with being in the databases... asserting that the Privacy act is sacred... you gave [your] data to them and you trusted the government with that information.”

Administration’s Defense and Misinterpretations

The Trump administration defends DOGE's actions by claiming that the agency's access to data is essential for identifying and eliminating fraud, waste, and inefficiency within federal operations.

Danielle Citron [08:36]: “The Trump administration is arguing that the DOGE employees... have every right to go into these systems of records to check for fraud, waste.”

However, Citron criticizes this stance as a fundamental misinterpretation of the Privacy Act, emphasizing that access to sensitive data should be tightly controlled and limited to specific, authorized purposes.

Danielle Citron [08:52]: “It's a fundamental misunderstanding of the Privacy act that if they worked at the Department of Education, they couldn't get into records that include, you know, personal data unless it was part of their job.”

Potential Outcomes and Democratic Implications

The episode concludes with a discussion on the broader implications of the legal battle, particularly the resilience of democratic institutions and the rule of law. Citron raises concerns about the administration's willingness to comply with judicial rulings.

Danielle Citron [09:47]: “...it may just say, sorry, I'm not going to comply with the court order. And I think at that moment... it's really testing our confidence in democracy and the rule of law.”

Chang echoes these concerns, underscoring the precarious balance between governmental efficiency and the protection of individual privacy rights.

Conclusion

As DOGE continues its push for access to sensitive personal data, the suite of lawsuits invoking the Privacy Act of 1974 represents a pivotal moment in the ongoing debate over privacy, governmental authority, and individual rights. The outcome of these legal challenges could have far-reaching consequences for data privacy and the limits of governmental oversight in the digital age.

---

Notable Contributions:

• Danielle Citron: Law Professor at the University of Virginia
• Jonathan Cummins: Former Software Engineer and Cybersecurity Professional at VA.gov

Production Credits:

• Producer: Katherine Fink
• Contributors: Laurel Wamsley, Jeanette Woods, Nadia Lancy
• Executive Producer: Sami Yenigun

---

This summary captures the essence of the NPR Consider This episode, providing a comprehensive overview of the key discussions surrounding DOGE's data access and the ensuing legal battles grounded in the Privacy Act of 1974.

Transcript

[Ailsa Chang]

Date of birth, home address, Social Security number. I mean, these are just a few examples of some of the personal information that the US Government collects on most of us and stores in databases across federal agencies. Well, the Department of Government Efficiency, or doge, created by President Trump, has been causing alarm by making massive cuts to federal staff, but it has also been seeking access to the troves of personal information that the government has on Americans, information that can go way beyond a Social Security number.

[Elizabeth Lair]

The level of sensitivity of the information that we're talking about is really unprecedented, and it is the most sensitive information that people provide about themselves.

[Ailsa Chang]

Elizabeth Lair directs the Equity and Civic Technology Project at the center for Democracy and Technology. She spoke with NPR's Laurel Wamsley.

[Elizabeth Lair]

It will include demographics about you, so your race, your sex, even if you have a disability. And then I think the thing that a lot of folks don't think about, because a number of the reports of the the systems that they've attempted to access or have actually accessed are financial in nature, but they also include really personal information about you. So just to take your tax records, you know, it will include any major life events that you've had. So whether you were pregnant and gave birth to a child or you adopted a child or you got married or divorced, whether you went bankrupt, you know, things that maybe your closest friends and family don't even know are included in these systems.

[Ailsa Chang]

And then there's the kind of information that's stored by agencies like Medicare, Medicaid and the va.

[Jonathan Cummins]

If you are a veteran that's getting medical care from va, your medical data is stored in VA databases, what conditions you're being treated for, what treatments you're receiving. If you have a VA therapist or you go to group therapy at va, then you know, therapy notes are being stored in VA databases. If you, I don't know, have an opioid addiction because of an injury that you received while you were in service, that that information is going to be potentially stored in the VA database.

[Ailsa Chang]

Jonathan Cummins has worked as a software engineer and cybersecurity professional for more than 30 years. His job was overseeing cybersecurity for the Department of Veterans affairs main website or va.gov he was fired from the US Digital Service on February 14, along with about 40 other people. Cammons says he doesn't what Elon Musk and his team have access to at the va, but he is worried about the kind of sensitive data that they could access from what's stored there.

[Jonathan Cummins]

There's all sorts of financial information because you know, in order to apply for benefits, sometimes you have to disclose details about your financial circumstances. So Doge claims that what it is trying to do is to find fraud and inefficiency and waste in the federal government so that it can be eliminated. And the single biggest budget line item at the VA is the benefits that are paid out to veterans. So if you're really looking for fraud and waste and inefficiency, you're not going to be able to do that at VA without looking at the veteran benefit databases, which are the ones that have the personal information in them.

[Ailsa Chang]

Doge's efforts to access these government databases have a lot of people wondering, is there anything that can protect the personal information that we have to hand over to the federal government? Consider this. A little known law exists to do just that, protect our sensitive data from government overreach. And more than a dozen lawsuits now invoke this 50 year old law to stop Doge's access to this information. From NPR, I'm Ilsa Chang.

[Danielle Citron]

This message comes from Saatva. Saatva luxury mattresses are made in America by expert craftsmen using the highest quality materials so that your mattress will provide comfortable sleep for years and years. Saatva mattresses are always delivered to your home and set up in the room of your choice. They're never folded and never squeezed into a small box. Visit saatva.com NPR where NPR listeners save an additional $200. This message comes from Carvana. Discover your car's worth with Carvana Value Tracker. Stay up to date when your car's value changes. Always know your car's worth with Carvana Value Tracker.

[Ailsa Chang]

It's consider this from npr. Across federal agencies, the government stores a lot of data, and often the data we entrust to federal agencies is very sensitive and very personal. Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency, or DoGE, has access to many of the databases storing that personal data, and that's raising alarm. At least a dozen lawsuits are attempting to stop Doge from tapping into all this personal information. And these lawsuits have focused on one particular legal Avenue, a 50 year old law called the Privacy act of 1974. With us to talk about that law is Danielle Citron. She's a law professor at the University of Virginia. Welcome.

[Danielle Citron]

Thank you for having me.

[Ailsa Chang]

So before we talk about these lawsuits, can you just take us back to the mid-1970s? How did the Privacy act of 1974 even come about? Like what was it designed originally to do?

[Danielle Citron]

So it was amidst a time in the late 60s where Congress sort of got wind of the fact that agencies had about 7,000 systems of records or databases. And they got really interested in it because the National Crime Information center, so the FBI now we think of as the database that shares criminal information between the states, locals, and the feds, had an incredible amount of sensitive information, including arrests that never went anywhere. And that information was being freely shared with employers, with colleges. So people were losing life opportunities. And, you know, all of this is happening in the backdrop of Watergate, in the backdrop of Hoover's blacklist, which contained files on every single senator and a congressman that were gathering personal data on each and every one of us that were being shared across agencies without any safeguards. And there was heated agreement across the aisle that we worried that it gave government a lot of power, excessive power that could control us.

[Ailsa Chang]

And I'm sure there are a lot of people out there today who never even knew the Privacy act of 1974 existed. How relevant has this law been over the last 50 years? How much has it been invoked when there are concerns with how the federal government is handling people's private information?

[Danielle Citron]

The Privacy act was once a quite sleepy law in my privacy classes. It's gotten increasing prominence in part because there's been so much compliance with the Privacy Act. You know, every agency now has to put out, you know, notices about having new collections of information in databases. And there's chief privacy officers at every agency. You have to pay attention to it and adhere to its commitments, which are to ensure that you don't collect information you shouldn't collecting for a proper purpose and that you're not sharing it with unless you meet the conditions of the Privacy Act.

[Ailsa Chang]

Okay, well, then let's talk about these dozen or so lawsuits now that concern access DOGE has had to personal data. Who exactly is filing these lawsuits? Like, what's the argument that the plaintiffs are making here?

[Danielle Citron]

Privacy groups and attorneys are representing employees of the government and individuals whose data is collected in these systems of records that are protected by the Privacy Act. And they're arguing that there's real harm here. They're losing their jobs. They're being fired. Presumably, we need to figure out in discovery if the loss of those jobs have to do with being in the databases. But we're pretty sure that's probably true. Need to figure out who the employees are so you can fire them. And asserting that the Privacy act is sacred and that we honor. When you turned over your data and you directly gave it to an agency, that it would only be accessed and used and disclosed pursuant to that reason, you gave it to them and you trusted the government with that information.

[Ailsa Chang]

Okay, but what is the argument that the Trump administration is making for why they are allowed members of DOGE are allowed to access this information?

[Danielle Citron]

The Trump administration is arguing that the DOGE employees, let's say they're working at the Department of Education, that they have every right to go into these systems of records to check for fraud, waste.

[Ailsa Chang]

And abuse simply because they are now employees of the Department of Education.

[Danielle Citron]

That's right. And it's a fundamental misunderstanding of the Privacy act that if they worked at the Department of Education, they couldn't get into records that include, you know, personal data unless it was part of their job. Right. And part of the Privacy act is really specific about conditions on when, for law enforcement purposes, you can disclose information that's protected by the Privacy Act. And, and it's only when the head of a law enforcement agency makes a written request and it's really particularized about what records it wants.

[Ailsa Chang]

Even if a judge does rule that federal agencies should not be sharing this sensitive data with doge, isn't there still the possibility that the Trump administration won't be deterred and will continue to give DOGE access anyway? I'm sorry to even be asking this question right now, but who's to say the Trump administration will care what a judge rules, Right?

[Danielle Citron]

I mean, that's the fundamental question on the minds of every law professor, lawyer and law student that even if, you know, court so orders that DOGE employees shouldn't have access to these records and that they should destroy any data that they collected in violation of the Privacy act, that they may just say, sorry, I'm not going to comply with the court order. And I think at that moment when that happens, you know, it's really testing our confidence in democracy and the rule of law.

[Ailsa Chang]

Danielle Citrin is a law professor at the University of Virginia. Thank you very much for speaking with us.

[Danielle Citron]

Thank you so much.

[Ailsa Chang]

This episode was produced by Katherine Fink. NPR correspondent Laurel Wamsley contributed to the episode. It was edited by Jeanette woods and Nadia Lancy. Our executive producer is Sami Yenigun. It's consider this from npr. I'm Ailsa Chang.

[Danielle Citron]

Here on Short Wave. We believe that science is for everyone and that every question is worth asking, no matter your age. My name is Willie, and my question is, is magic real? Our podcast is for the curious at heart. Come embrace your inner child. When you listen now to Short Wave from NPR.

[Ailsa Chang]

On Throughline from npr, the.

[Jonathan Cummins]

Consequences for the country would have been enormous. It would have been a crisis.

[Ailsa Chang]

The man who saw a dangerous omission in the US Constitution and took it upon himself to fix it. Find NPR's through line wherever you get your podcasts. Want to hear this podcast without sponsor breaks? Amazon prime members can listen to Consider this sponsor free through Amazon Music. Or you can also support NPR's vital journalism and get consider this [e-mail] that's plus.NPR.org.