Government Employees Argue DOGE, OPM Privacy Case Remains Relevant
The American Federation of Government Employees and others argued Monday that charges against the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) for improperly accessing sensitive information at the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) remains “a live controversy” and shouldn't 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.
In a court document, they said OPM “continues to wrongly assert” the power of DOGE employees to access “millions of government-employee records.” DOGE's “updated privacy and cybersecurity policy” doesn't change things, they added.
Further, the “purported removal of DOGE agents from OPM records systems ... can be undone at any moment with a few keystrokes.” Changes OPM has made since the case was filed are “a tactic timed to evade the merits of this case,” it added.
The Federation sued OPM in February, claiming DOGE violated the Privacy Act of 1974 when it accessed OPM data (case 1:25-cv-01237) (see 250312044). The U.S. District Court for Southern New York Judge Denise Cote granted an injunction against the federal government in June (see 25-6090043), and later ruled OPM must prove DOGE employees complied with the Privacy Act (see 2506230052).
More recently, the group of government employees has argued the case should continue due to continuing privacy harms (see 2510230016). But DOJ has claimed the case is moot (see 2512080033).