A Joe Biden-appointed federal judge has blocked President Donald Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from accessing data from three federal agencies.
U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman argues that the data-sharing effort is a potential legal breach linked to the Trump administration, Fox Business reported.
The judge issued a ruling that temporarily blocks the DOGE’s access to certain personal data.
The ruling spotlights the ongoing judicial challenges to recent executive actions initiated by President Trump.
In the detailed judgment delivered on Monday by Judge Boardman, an injunction was placed on DOGE to restrict Elon Musk’s team from accessing identifiable personal information held by the U.S. Department of Education, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), and the Treasury Department.
This decision stemmed from a lawsuit brought forth by various unions and organizations representing federal employees, recipients of student aid, and six veterans who had served in the military.
The controversy traces back to the executive order signed by Trump at the dawn of his second term.
This directive sought to facilitate the DOGE’s agenda by granting access to agency records and IT systems.
This sweeping access was meant as a step toward improving government performance but faced allegations of contravening the Privacy Act and the Administrative Procedure Act.
The Privacy Act, created half a century ago, aims to shield individuals from the unauthorized distribution of personal data furnished to the government.
Judge Boardman conveyed the inherent risks posed by such unauthorized data use, noting Congress’s earlier concerns about personal data being collected and potentially misused by governmental entities.
The recent ruling lies within a broader context of numerous legal confrontations against Trump’s actions since January 20.
In just two months, over 120 lawsuits have been presented in reaction to more than 90 executive orders, proclamations, and memos issued under Trump’s administration.
This specific case emphasizes the potential risks associated with expedited policy enforcement without stringent adherence to legislative frameworks.
In her ruling, Judge Boardman emphasized that the president’s urgency did not empower agencies to bypass legal procedures.
She conveyed the court’s perspective:
“No matter how important or urgent the president’s DOGE agenda may be, federal agencies must execute it in accordance with the law.
“That likely did not happen in this case.”
Judge Boardman claimed that her ruling was about safeguarding personal liberties.
She highlighted that after the executive directive, federal bodies like the Education Department, Treasury, and OPM opened their records to DOGE affiliates.
Bowman claims that auditing these taxpayer-funded departments sparks significant privacy law infringement concerns.
In her ruling, the judge asserted:
“Congress’s concern back then was that ‘every detail of our personal lives can be assembled instantly for use by a single bureaucrat or institution.’
“Those concerns are just as salient today.”
The judgment casts a spotlight on the efforts of Democrat-aligned judges to undermine the authority of the president.
