Several federal agencies urged a Fourth Circuit panel Monday to allow the Department of Government Efficiency to continue accessing millions of people’s personally identifiable information.
The oral argument comes a month after the same panel issued an order granting the government’s motion to stay a preliminary injunction barring DOGE employees from accessing sensitive data after finding the plaintiffs likely lack standing.
Maryland-based U.S. District Judge Deborah L. Boardman, a Joe Biden appointee, granted the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction on March 24, finding the defendants likely violated the acts.
“No matter how important or urgent the President’s DOGE agenda may be, federal agencies must execute it in accordance with the law,” Boardman wrote. “That likely did not happen in this case.”
The agencies argued to the three-judge panel that the plaintiffs lacked standing, claiming they suffered no injury as the individuals voluntarily provided the data to the government. The agencies believe that for the plaintiff to establish standing, DOGE must do more than access their information; they must use it for unlawful purposes.
They also argued their conduct is exempt under the Privacy Act’s need-to-know exemption. The plaintiffs countered that the agencies failed to give any reason why the DOGE employees would need access to the information.
U.S. Circuit Court Judge Julius Richardson, a President Donald Trump appointee, offered a hypothetical scenario to illustrate why he believes DOGE employees need access to the records to do their job. On his first day back in the Oval Office, Trump signed an executive order to create DOGE and direct it to modernize federal technology and software to maximize efficiency.
Richardson said if he ordered his law clerk to improve a local library, they would need access to the library, its staff, books and website to understand what problems need addressing.
“How is my law clerk supposed to know on the front end whether he needs access to the staffing or he needs access to the subscribers or users of the library until he has some idea of what the problems are, and to know what the problems are, he has to be to go in the library,” Richardson asked. “How is he supposed to know how to improve the library without access to the library?”
Add new comment