SCOTUS grants DOGE access to all YOUR Social Security Information

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Again, what are you so afraid of?
You think the DOGE team is going to destroy your credit or something?
Grow the **** up, kid.

Where do you think the data that is sold on the dark web comes from? From data breaches. And most data breaches are caused by either the inadvertent or intentional acts of insiders.

Once your privacy is breached, this is not something that can be undone.

-------
On June 6, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 6–3 decision, granted the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) broad access to sensitive data held by the Social Security Administration (SSA). This includes Social Security numbers, medical and mental health records, financial information, and family court documents for millions of Americans

The Court's order temporarily lifts a prior injunction by U.S. District Judge Ellen Hollander, who had blocked DOGE's access due to potential violations of federal privacy laws. Judge Hollander had emphasized that DOGE failed to justify its need for such expansive access and that allowing it could breach the Privacy Act of 1974 .

The three liberal justices—Ketanji Brown Jackson, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan—dissented, expressing concerns over the risks to Americans' privacy. Justice Jackson noted that granting DOGE "unfettered data access" before legal proceedings conclude poses "grave privacy risks for millions".

DOGE, established during President Trump's second term and previously led by Elon Musk, aims to reduce federal workforce and expenditures. However, its methods and access to sensitive data have sparked significant legal and ethical debates. Critics argue that DOGE's actions may lead to misuse of personal information and lack adequate oversight

Given that the SSA collects data from individuals starting with their first qualifying job, this development affects all Americans, not just those nearing retirement or eligible for Medicare. The potential implications for privacy and data security are substantial, and ongoing legal challenges may further address these concerns.

Supreme Court Grants DOGE Access to Social Security Data Amid Privacy Concerns


reuters.com
US Supreme Court allows DOGE broad access to Social Security data
Today



apnews.com
Supreme Court allows DOGE team to access Social Security systems with data on millions of Americans
Today


timesofindia.indiatimes.com
Win for Trump administration: US Supreme Court allows DOGE to access social security data; transparency obligations limited
Today

 

[Orangecat]

Well, do you want to send me your information?

 

[Orangecat]

Where do you think the data that is sold on the dark web comes from? From data breaches. And most data breaches are caused by either the inadvertent or intentional acts of insiders.

Once your privacy is breached, this is not something that can be undone.

-------
On June 6, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 6–3 decision, granted the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) broad access to sensitive data held by the Social Security Administration (SSA). This includes Social Security numbers, medical and mental health records, financial information, and family court documents for millions of Americans

The Court's order temporarily lifts a prior injunction by U.S. District Judge Ellen Hollander, who had blocked DOGE's access due to potential violations of federal privacy laws. Judge Hollander had emphasized that DOGE failed to justify its need for such expansive access and that allowing it could breach the Privacy Act of 1974 .

The three liberal justices—Ketanji Brown Jackson, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan—dissented, expressing concerns over the risks to Americans' privacy. Justice Jackson noted that granting DOGE "unfettered data access" before legal proceedings conclude poses "grave privacy risks for millions".

DOGE, established during President Trump's second term and previously led by Elon Musk, aims to reduce federal workforce and expenditures. However, its methods and access to sensitive data have sparked significant legal and ethical debates. Critics argue that DOGE's actions may lead to misuse of personal information and lack adequate oversight

Given that the SSA collects data from individuals starting with their first qualifying job, this development affects all Americans, not just those nearing retirement or eligible for Medicare. The potential implications for privacy and data security are substantial, and ongoing legal challenges may further address these concerns.

Supreme Court Grants DOGE Access to Social Security Data Amid Privacy Concerns


reuters.com
US Supreme Court allows DOGE broad access to Social Security data
Today



apnews.com
Supreme Court allows DOGE team to access Social Security systems with data on millions of Americans
Today


timesofindia.indiatimes.com
Win for Trump administration: US Supreme Court allows DOGE to access social security data; transparency obligations limited
Today

Same question to you:
What are you afraid of that the DOGE team will do with your information that any other number of bureaucrats and institutions who have it won't?

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Not to jump into the debate, but my understanding is that DOGE is looking for fraud.
So people over 100, multiple people with the same number and different addresses.
Cross-check so no dead people are getting benefits, or are still paying contributions/working.
There should only be one person using each number

DOGE having "read only" access to information to save SS money is a very good thing.

Why do you think "read only" access is a good thing?

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Same question to you:
What are you afraid of that the DOGE team will do with your information that any other number of bureaucrats and institutions who have it won't?

I despise incompetence masquerading as professionalism or competence. And while I don't generally denigrate people for being ignorant, since you posed a specific question to me, I'll answer it.

It has nothing to do with "fear" it has everything to do with wanting the rights we have to be protected and not tossed out on a bogus premises that DOGE is rooting out "fraud & abuse" when what we have seen from this administration's attempt to accomplish multiple goals are abysmal.

I highlighted the applicable pieces in red in the information I posted. Your medical information is protected by HIPAA and not any & everyone is supposed to have access to it. HOWEVER companies use pretext and a convoluted system to sometimes bypass these protections such a when filing a disability claim which the SSA also handles - SSDI.

So you're asking the wrong question. People don't have to fear something to not want just any ole asshole having access to their PERSONAL & PROTECTED (supposed to be) information.

 

[excalibur]

Well some seem to interpret it in one way but there is also some interesting comments that keeps the door open.

Instead, the justices sent the dispute back to a federal appeals court with instructions for those judges to take another, more skeptical look at the order.
it then says
the court temporarily paused an order by a federal judge in Washington, D.C., that would have required DOGE to provide information in a lawsuit filed under the Freedom of Information Act. Instead, the justices sent the dispute back to a federal appeals court with instructions for those judges to take another, more skeptical look at the order.

Its not over and the SC left the door open

What I wrote in the OP:

These cases have been remanded with strong language by the Supreme Court.

 

[Orangecat]

I despise incompetence masquerading as professionalism or competence. And while I don't generally denigrate people for being ignorant, since you posed a specific question to me, I'll answer it.

It has nothing to do with "fear" it has everything to do with wanting the rights we have to be protected and not tossed out on a bogus premises that DOGE is rooting out "fraud & abuse" when what we have seen from this administration's attempt to accomplish multiple goals are abysmal.

I highlighted the applicable pieces in red in the information I posted. Your medical information is protected by HIPAA and not any & everyone is supposed to have access to it. HOWEVER companies use pretext and a convoluted system to sometimes bypass these protections such a when filing a disability claim which the SSA also handles - SSDI.

So you're asking the wrong question. People don't have to fear something to not want just any ole asshole having access to their PERSONAL & PROTECTED (supposed to be) information.

IOW, you're paranoid. That's okay.

 

[1srelluc]

And mightily bored they'll be.

 

[Crepitus]

The Supreme Court on Friday let members of the Department of Government Efficiency, formed by Elon Musk, have access to sensitive records of many millions of Americans held by the Social Security Administration.

The court’s order was brief and unsigned, which is typical when the justices rule on emergency applications.

The Trump administration said it needed the data to root out waste and fraud and to modernize the agency’s operations. Two labor unions and an advocacy group represented by Democracy Forward Foundation sued to block access, saying that much of the information was deeply personal and protected by privacy laws.

The court responded that the agency “may proceed” to allow DOGE access to the records necessary to do its work.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/06/us/politics/supreme-court-doge-social-security.html

************************
This is what MAGA wanted and this is what MAGA got.

DOGE now has access to social security information of many millions of Americans. That information is some of the most sensitive we have. Though Musk is no longer involved his people will have access to that information. I am sure Musk and Peter Thiel are smiling today. It was a good day for those that want to erode your personal privacy and access to your most sensitive information.

So the conservative justices who had a meltdown over their "privacy" being violated by Dobbs protests in front of their homes are cool with Musk's Doge minions rampaging through the personal data of EVERY American.

If it weren't for double standards the republicans would have no standards at all.

 

[leftwinger]

Stupid Board Swine.

 

[kyzr]

Why do you think "read only" access is a good thing?

DOGE can't change anything, they would forward their findings to the SS staff for review and any actions.

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

Trump, his cult and other RWNJ's whine about the 'Deep State".
They found it and they like it and defend it.

The most gullible, dumbest people on the planet

 

[fncceo]

SCOTUS grants DOGE access to all YOUR Social Security Information​

That doesn’t bother me… just as long as they don’t get hold of my browser history.

We all go to weird places.

 

[Blaster]

A nothing burger.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

IOW, you're paranoid. That's okay.

You're confused — paranoia is an irrational belief that someone is out to get you. My concern is rooted in facts and policy, not fear. Your lack of understanding of the systems involved doesn't turn informed critique into paranoia.

You've asked "what are you afraid of?" multiple times now — as if fear is the only valid motivator for protecting sensitive data. It's not. It's about boundaries, law, and accountability.

The Social Security Administration holds banking data for people receiving benefits. Does that mean it's okay for just anyone to have access to it? Or should people expect that protected information remains protected?

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

DOGE can't change anything, they would forward their findings to the SS staff for review and any actions.

I think you may have misunderstood my question. If someone has full browsing rights to the entire database, then they have access to sensitive information that is supposed to be protected by multiple laws — HIPAA being just one.

SSA databases also contain banking details for recipients who use direct deposit. Hopefully those are masked in the UI, but at the table level, that data is usually still visible to developers and database admins. These roles often have permissions beyond read-only.

Data breaches don’t just happen through external hacks — they happen when internal access is misused or resold.

And yes — changing values like benefit amounts or rerouting payments to a new bank account isn’t just data exposure. That’s a different class of cybercrime entirely.

 

[Orangecat]

Or should people expect that protected information remains protected?

Protected from people given legal access to it? Nothing has changed except a few new people now have access to your info. I happens every time a new person is hired by the government in one of those agencies. I still contend paranoia, mixed with an unhealthy dose of TDS.

 

[skews13]

Why would the Supreme Court allow any government entity grant Social Security Data on any of us much less all of us? What about privacy? Is this not unconstitutional? Personal information and medical data is at risk and who wants to know and WHY is the big question. Think about this for a minute. WHY?

Please explain to me why in the world would Supreme Ct. grant Doge access to our S S data?

Why would the Supreme Court allow any government entity grant Social Security Data on any of us much less all of us? What about privacy? Is this not unconstitutional? Personal information and medical data is at risk and who wants to know and WHY is the...

www.dailykos.com

 

[Oddball]

It's really cute that you and your loony corporate paymasters over at Daily Kooks believe that information to be super-duper, extra strength, for-your-eyes-only secret.

That shit has been hacked and illegally looked over so many times that it'd make your head spin....Well, not if those with (D) by their name were doing so....But still....

 

[Darkwind]

What is one more entity?

Or do you think that your SSAN isn't already in 100s of entities?

Everyone uses the damn number for everything.

I have some bad news for you, sunshine. DOGE is no more a threat to your privacy than your ******* Mortgage company, Insurance Company, Bank Institution, etc..