Is Privacy Dead?

A. Perez, Netlok, 6/9/2025

Supreme Court Allows DOGE Access to Social Security Database: Privacy Implications for the Future

The Supreme Court Ruling

On June 6, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 to allow the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) unfettered access to Social Security Administration (SSA) databases containing sensitive personal information on millions of Americans 1, 2, 3. The Court granted the Trump administration’s emergency request to lift a lower court injunction that had previously restricted DOGE’s access to these systems due to privacy concerns 4, 5.

In an unsigned three-paragraph order, the majority concluded that “under the present circumstances, SSA may proceed to afford members of the SSA DOGE Team access to the agency records in question in order for those members to do their work”6, 7. The decision overturned a ruling by U.S. District Judge Ellen Hollander in Maryland, who had found that DOGE’s broad access likely violated federal privacy law 8.

This SCOTUS decision concerns Netlok and other cybersecurity companies because we are required to protect Personal Private Information (PPI). However, if DOGE’s collection and storage of PPI is hacked into by nation-states and bad actors, PPI becomes public information, which begs the question, “Is Privacy Dead?”

What Data is at Risk

The Social Security Administration’s databases contain some of the most sensitive personal information held by the federal government 9, 13. This includes:

Core identity information: Social Security numbers, birth dates, addresses, and marital status 13
Financial records: Lifetime earnings, bank account information, and tax data13, 22
Medical information: Health records, mental health treatment histories, and disability documentation 2 4
Family details: Information about children, spouse relationships, and family court records 2, 7
Immigration data: Work authorization and immigration status records 22

As privacy expert Kathleen Romig, a former SSA employee, noted, the agency possesses personal data about most Americans that spans “from cradle to grave”13.

Legal Challenges and Privacy Act Violations

The Privacy Act of 1974

The legal battle centers on the Privacy Act of 1974, a Watergate-era law designed to protect Americans’ personal information from federal government misuse 12, 17. This landmark legislation establishes strict limitations on how federal agencies can collect, use, and disclose personal information, requiring consent for most data sharing and imposing penalties for unauthorized access 17, 18.

Legal experts argue that DOGE’s access represents “an egregious violation of the Act” and potentially “the worst violation of the Privacy Act since its enactment in 1974” 18, 19. More than a dozen lawsuits have been filed invoking the Privacy Act to challenge DOGE’s data access across multiple federal agencies 20, 23.

Court Dissents and Concerns

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, joined by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, issued a blistering dissent warning that the decision “creates grave privacy risks for millions of Americans” 2 4. Jackson criticized the majority for allowing DOGE “unfettered access to this personal, non-anonymized information right now — before the courts have time to assess whether DOGE’s access is lawful” 4 7.

The dissenting justices emphasized that the government had failed to demonstrate any necessity for bypassing existing privacy protections 24.

Privacy Implications Going Forward

Weakening of Federal Privacy Protections

Privacy advocates warn that this ruling sets a dangerous precedent by prioritizing administrative efficiency over individual privacy rights 2 9. As American Oversight Executive Director Chioma Chukwu stated, “The Court’s shielding of those in power while stripping protections from the American people sets a dangerous precedent and is exactly backwards in a functioning democracy” 2.

The decision effectively undermines the foundational principle that has governed SSA for nearly 90 years: an expectation of privacy concerning its records 24. Legal experts worry this could “turn privacy law into an empty promise” 9.

Expansion of Government Data Access

The ruling may embolden similar data-sharing initiatives across the federal government 27. DOGE has already sought access to sensitive databases at the Treasury Department, Education Department, and Office of Personnel Management 10, 14. The Supreme Court’s backing of DOGE’s Social Security access could facilitate broader government data consolidation efforts 11, 15.

Increased Risk of Data Breaches and Misuse

Security experts have raised alarm about the risks associated with DOGE’s data access practices 25, 28. Recent investigations have revealed over 150 government database servers exposed to the internet, creating unprecedented vulnerabilities to cyberattacks 25, 28. The combination of expanded data access and weakened security protocols creates “grave privacy risks” for millions of Americans 4.

Future Legislative Response

The ruling is likely to accelerate legislative efforts to strengthen data protection laws 27. Congress is already considering bills like the Social Security Data Protection Act, which would impose strict audit requirements on agencies handling sensitive information 27. State-level privacy legislation may also be strengthened in response to federal privacy rollbacks 27.

Expert Analysis and Ongoing Concerns

Privacy law experts have described DOGE’s data practices as representing a fundamental shift away from established privacy protections 18, 20. Professor Danielle Citron noted that the Privacy Act was created specifically to address concerns about government agencies accessing sensitive databases without proper safeguards 12.

The American Civil Liberties Union has demanded transparency about DOGE’s data practices, filing Freedom of Information Act requests to uncover the full extent of the agency’s access to Americans’ personal information 11. The organization warned that DOGE has already started “removing some protections around personal data” 11.

Democracy Forward, representing the plaintiffs in the Social Security case, stated that the ruling would “jeopardize the data of millions of Americans” and vowed to continue using “every legal avenue available to prevent unelected officials from misusing the public’s most sensitive information” 24.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s decision to allow DOGE access to Social Security databases marks a significant erosion of privacy protections that have safeguarded Americans’ personal information for decades 2, 18. While the administration argues this access is necessary to combat fraud and modernize government systems 6, 10, privacy advocates warn of unprecedented risks to data security and individual privacy rights 2, 19.

The ruling’s long-term implications extend beyond Social Security data, potentially opening the door for expanded government surveillance and data collection without adequate oversight15, 27. As legal challenges continue in lower courts, the ultimate impact on American privacy rights will depend on how aggressively the government pursues data access and whether Congress acts to strengthen privacy protections 20, 23.

Is Privacy Dead?

More Articles