DOJ: Drop DOGE, OPM Privacy Case for Lack of Relevancy
DOJ argued Friday that a case against the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) for improperly accessing sensitive information at the Office of Personnel Management is no longer relevant and should be dropped.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Privacy Daily provides accurate coverage of newsworthy developments in data protection legislation, regulation, litigation, and enforcement for privacy professionals responsible for ensuring effective organizational data privacy compliance.
“The ground has shifted” since this case started [in February], DOJ said in a court document. “None of the so-called ‘DOGE Agents’ currently have access to Plaintiffs’ personally identifying information (PII) in any OPM data systems because either they left OPM employment or their access permissions were removed.” Some reports also indicate DOGE was disbanded entirely.
Additionally, policies for "all new employees and contractors" seeking access to OPM systems containing PII have been changed, "ensuring adherence to the Privacy Act and addressing this Court’s stated concerns,” the government said.
Given this, “Plaintiffs no longer are suffering a continuing injury -- no one has impermissible access to their PII,” rendering the case moot.
Case 1:25-cv-01237 began in February when the American Federation of Government Employees and others claimed that DOGE violated the Privacy Act of 1974 when it accessed OPM data (see 2503170044). Judge Denise Cote of the U.S. District Court for Southern New York granted an injunction against the federal government in June (see 2506090043), and later ruled OPM must prove DOGE employees complied with the Privacy Act (see 2506230052).
Plaintiffs, the American Federation of Government Employees, have argued the case should move ahead, citing continued harms (see 2510230016).