DOGE Social Security Data Access Threatens Millions

When Mike Russo entered Social Security Administration headquarters on January 31, he introduced himself to agency staff as a representative of Elon Musk’s so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), according to court filings. 

Along with Akash Bobba, a 22-year-old former Meta and Palantir intern, Russo demanded sweeping access to data on every person in the United States with a Social Security number. Social Security Administration (SSA) insiders warn the sharing of this data puts Americans at risk of identity fraud — and that it could be used by Donald Trump’s administration to punish, threaten, or blackmail his political enemies, both at home and abroad. 

On Thursday, a federal judge ordered Musk and DOGE to stop accessing the data and delete any non-anonymized Social Security records they have collected, saying that DOGE had failed to even explain why it needed the information. 

DOGE “never identified or articulated even a single reason for which the DOGE Team needs unlimited access to SSA’s entire record systems, thereby exposing personal, confidential, sensitive, and private information that millions of Americans entrusted to their government,” District Judge Ellen Lipton Hollander concluded in issuing a temporary restraining order against DOGE’s access to Social Security data.

Hollander also pointed out the irony of DOGE attempting to withhold the identities of its employees handling the SSA data based on the idea “the disclosure of even their names would expose them to harassment and thus invade their privacy.”

DOGE “does not appear to share a privacy concern for the millions of Americans whose SSA records were made available to the DOGE affiliates, without their consent, and which contain sensitive, confidential, and personally identifiable information,” Hollander wrote.

Hollander’s order does allow the SSA to grant DOGE members “access to redacted or anonymized data and records” if they receive training for employees who typically work with Social Security data systems, and ensure they comply with federal laws, regulations, and policies governing the privacy of personally identifiable information.

In response, SSA acting commissioner Leland Dudek said he could bring the entire agency to a halt, arguing the order was so broad he would have to “terminate access by all SSA employees to our IT systems.”

“Really, I want to turn it off and let the courts figure out how they want to run a federal agency,” he added, according to Bloomberg News.

Hollander’s order came in response to a lawsuit filed by the AFL-CIO, one of America’s biggest labor unions, over DOGE’s access to SSA data. The lawsuit contained the testimony of a 30-year veteran of the agency, Tiffany Flick, who said in a deposition that DOGE’s demand for the data was unusual and improper. That’s because neither Russo, the SSA’s new chief information officer who is tied to Musk’s company SpaceX, nor Bobba, were SSA employees, Flick noted. And neither had the training or clearances typically required for access to the data they demanded. Of equal concern, Social Security insiders tell Rolling Stone, is that DOGE was making the data vulnerable to abuse by what Flick called “bad actors.”

“I am not confident that DOGE associates have the requisite knowledge and training to prevent sensitive information from being inadvertently transferred to bad actors,” Flick said in her written deposition.

Two SSA insiders warn the potential for misuse of this data is virtually endless: The agency data could be used by hostile foreign governments to locate defectors and political dissidents inside the United States; officials in DOGE and the Trump administration itself could theoretically use the data to threaten elected officials and journalists, among other political foes, or create databases of transgendered Americans and citizens who were born in other countries.  

The data given to DOGE includes the addresses, medical and work histories, tax, banking and citizenship information, benefit amounts, and family records of every person in the United States with a Social Security number or who has applied for benefits. DOGE officials were granted access to this data over the objections of Flick and former Social Security Commissioner Michelle King, who resigned in protest over the episode. Despite the pushback, DOGE was able to access the data thanks, in part, to Dudek, who has become key to DOGE’s work inside the agency. 

Now, agency insiders and some House Democrats want to know exactly what DOGE is doing with the data it has had access to for nearly two months — questions that went unanswered to Judge Hollander, who said government attorneys could not explain why DOGE even needed the data. “The silence on this issue is deafening,” Hollander wrote in her order. 

Republicans, meanwhile, have defended DOGE’s access to the data as part of its efforts to supposedly root out fraud, waste, and abuse inside the SSA and scores of other government agencies.

The confusion and lack of transparency about DOGE’s work inside the SSA — and its need for Social Security data on hundreds of millions of Americans — is mirrored by ongoing legal battles over DOGE’s work within the government. In court filings reviewed by Rolling Stone, government lawyers have argued that DOGE is part of the Executive Office of the President and reports to Trump and White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, and that it works in conjunction with federal agencies’ staff, who can “freely veto” any decision by DOGE staffers like Russo and Bobba, according to the government’s March 14 response in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW). 

Insiders and agency veterans worry that the data DOGE has access to isn’t secure, and could be stolen or hacked by the “bad actors” that Flick mentioned in her deposition. One source close to the agency tells Rolling Stone they worried that foreign governments could use the data to locate defectors or political dissidents within the United States. The source also expressed concern that terrorist organizations could use the data to find foreign nationals who have aided the U.S. military and intelligence community in fighting in the Middle East. Another source warned that law enforcement and intelligence sources living in witness protection could be exposed by the data, as well as everyday Americans who could be viewed by Musk and the Trump administration as political enemies. 

Some of those perceived enemies could include transgender Americans, according to Zinnia Jones, a transgender activist and researcher. Jones warned that the SSA data could be used to “identify nearly all likely transgender people in the US with 99 percent confidence.” Jones cited a 2015 U.S. Census Bureau study that utilized the same SSA data accessed by DOGE to estimate the number of transgendered Americans.

“For all we know, they may already know about the possibility of doing this and it’s part of why they insisted so forcefully on full access” to the data, Jones tells Rolling Stone. In her deposition, Flick noted that Bobba requested and was eventually given access to the SSA’s full dataset, “including source code.”

A former federal employee speaking on the condition of anonymity out of fear of retribution agreed with Jones’ assessment, telling Rolling Stone that the Trump administration could use the SSA data — as well as agency hiring paperwork and passport applications — to identify and purge transgender employees from the government.

The Trump administration is already leading an aggressive crackdown on trans life in America. Musk has been outspoken on transgender issues for years following his daughter’s transition, which he blames on the “woke mind virus.” His thoughts on transgender people appear to have helped drive his shift to the hard right. 

But it’s not just that the data now in DOGE’s hands could be abused by the Trump administration or accessed by non-government actors. AFL-CIO lawyers said in a March 13 filing in the organization’s lawsuit against the SSA that the administration may have violated the Privacy Act of 1974, which requires the government to properly secure and handle Americans’ personal data.

Judge Hollander found Thursday that plaintiffs are “likely to succeed” in their claim that the administration has violated the Privacy Act. 

Russo, Bobba, and other DOGE staffers inside the SSA have insisted they need access to the data to carry out their work looking for fraud. But in a second deposition on March 13, Flick said the data given to DOGE isn’t necessary to find instances of fraud.

“In my experience, the type of full, non-anonymized access of individual data on every person who has a Social Security number or receives benefit from Social Security is unnecessary at the outset of any anti-fraud or other auditing project,” Flick said.

DOGE’S ACCESS TO SSA DATABASES was at least the second time the organization’s data gathering operations have raised concerns among Democrats, advocates and agency insiders. In February, DOGE accessed sensitive Treasury Department payment systems. 

Last week, a Treasury Department employee testified that Marko Elez — the DOGE staffer who resigned under public pressure after his racist posts were found online, and whom Vice President J.D. Vance successfully lobbied Musk to rehire — broke protocol when he shared a spreadsheet containing personal information of unidentified persons to officials in the General Services Administration. After being ousted from the Treasury Department, Elez was reinstated to a DOGE position at the SSA.

DOGE’s access to SSA data and the Treasury systems was seized upon by House Democrats, who issued resolutions of inquiry last week demanding more information from DOGE and the Trump administration about why DOGE needed the data to find fraud and waste in those agencies. Democrats took the resolutions to the House Ways and Means Committee, only to have Republicans vote to dismiss the demands.

In a hearing preceding the vote, Reps. Danny Davis (D-Ill.) and John Larson (D-Conn.) lambasted Republicans — who defended DOGE as simply seeking to eliminate fraud, waste, and abuse at the SSA, Treasury and other federal agencies. Davis wondered whether the data DOGE has gained access to could be used for political persecution or be shared with right-wing militant groups.

“We don’t know if the Musk hackers with histories of racism, who took screenshots of private information, [will] share it with the Proud Boys,” he said.

Committee members including Reps. Jodey Arrington (R-Texas) and Aaron Bean (R-Fla.) defended DOGE’s work.

“It’s almost as if we owned a store that was robbed, and Elon Musk watches the video and says, ‘Here’s who stole from you,’ and we say, ‘Oh my gosh, I can’t believe he looked at the video tape. He had no authority to look at the video tape of who robbed me,’” Bean argued.

Larson, who has introduced a bill that would protect Americans’ private information like that which is contained in the SSA data, tells Rolling Stone in a statement that Musk “and his minions don’t need access to Americans’ names, addresses, and financial information.”

While congressional Republicans have refused Democrats’ calls for transparency, government lawyers have been forced by courts to answer questions about DOGE’s work and data access, thanks to ongoing lawsuits from CREW, the AFL-CIO and a coalition of 21 Democratic attorneys general. 

The lawsuits have provided some of the most detailed information yet about DOGE’s operations inside government agencies. Government lawyers have said that DOGE is part of the White House, making it exempt from disclosing documents and records under public records laws. CREW has argued that DOGE wields vast authority that is completely independent of the White House — canceling contracts and programs, eliminating internal agency offices and firing workers and, in the case of the SSA, closing field offices. If DOGE is acting independently of the White House, CREW argues, it is subject to FOIA.

Dudek, the acting SSA chief, recently attempted to assert the agency’s independence from DOGE’s decisionmaking in a call with reporters, saying that the “SSA team” makes final decisions about its operations, according to The Washington Post. The Trump administration has made similar arguments in court filings. 

The confusion and ongoing legal arguments over DOGE’s technical definition — whether it is an independent agency or part of the Trump White House that is exempt from FOIA — is only added to by the unclear role of Amy Gleason, DOGE’s “acting administrator.” On March 14, Gleason filed a deposition in CREW’s lawsuit against DOGE, testifying to the court that she oversees all DOGE employees, including those who are detailed to DOGE from government agencies. Gleason also claimed that Musk does not work at the U.S. DOGE Service, as it is known.

“Elon Musk does not work at USDS,” Gleason testified in her deposition. “I do not report to him, and he does not report to me.”

Gleason’s testimony is at odds with DOGE’s day-to-day operations, according to ProPublica, which reported that top Musk deputy Steve Davis “runs the show.” The New York Times similarly reported Thursday that Davis “has effectively become the day-to-day leader of DOGE.”

Who exactly runs DOGE is important considering the data now under its control, one current SSA employee and a former SSA staffer say. 

“Where they could really fuck with people could be, ‘This doctor is getting paid by a clinic/company that provides abortions or abortifacient medicine. Let’s refer them for investigation to the state A.G.,’” the current SSA employee, who has worked for government agencies for the last five years, tells Rolling Stone.

This story is being published in partnership with American Doom, a newsletter that focuses on right-wing extremism and other threats to democracy. Have a tip? Contact Justin Glawe on Signal at justinglawe.20.