Administrative judges' lawsuit says DOGE inquiry threatens their safety

By Karen Sloan

Feb 12 (Reuters) - Administrative law judges claim that the potential disclosure of their personal information sought by the Department of Government Efficiency threatens their safety, in a lawsuit that joins a wave of actions seeking to disrupt the Trump administration's efforts to pare back the federal workforce.

The Association of Administrative Law Judges — a union that represents 910 administrative law judges who adjudicate cases at the Social Security Administration — filed suit on Tuesday alongside several other unions that represent government workers.

The lawsuit, filed in a New York federal court, asks the court to stop DOGE, led by Trump ally Elon Musk, from accessing personal and employment records through the Office of Personnel Management, which functions as the federal government’s human resources department.

The complaint names the OPM, DOGE and Musk as defendants, and it alleges the disclosure of workers’ personal information poses a security risk. It claims the OPM violated the Privacy Act when it gave DOGE access to its systems and records after Donald Trump took office. The Privacy Act prohibits federal agencies from disclosing personal information without authorization.

“Our members are frequently subjected to threats, so the enforcement of the Privacy Act is at the top of mind to our members,” said Association of Administrative Law Judges President Som Ramrup on Wednesday.

Neither DOGE nor the OPM responded to requests for comment on Wednesday, but Musk defended his group’s cost cutting efforts during a White House appearance on Tuesday, saying they are eliminating government waste and inefficiency. Musk also pledged to further shrink the federal workforce by laying off employees and eliminating functions.

The Association of Administrative Law Judges is not a frequent litigator but has sued the government before, Ramrup said. In 2020, during Trump’s first term, the group unsuccessfully sued the Federal Service Impasses Panel, which mediates federal labor disputes. That suit alleged the panel was circumventing the proper process for appointing members.

The extensive suitability and background checks administrative law judges undergo include sensitive information about their health and their families, their Social Security numbers and their addresses, Ramrup said. Their role as adjudicators of Social Security matters makes them targets for those who are unhappy with their decisions, she added.

Over the past several weeks, federal workers, states and other groups have sued the Trump administration seeking to stop DOGE from accessing U.S. Treasury Department payment systems, from accessing Labor Department systems, and blocking the buyout plan for federal employees, among other things.

Administrative judges operate separately from judges who preside over federal courts, who are known as Article III judges. Administrative judges adjudicate matters within agencies that come under the executive branch, which include the Social Security Administration, the U.S. Department of Labor and the Drug Enforcement Administration.

The case is American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO v. U.S Office of Personnel Management, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, No. 1:25-cv-01237.

For the plaintiffs: Rhett Millsaps, Mark Lemley, Mark McKenna and Christopher Sprigman of Lex Lumina; Mario Trujillo and Victoria Noble of the Electronic Frontier Foundation; Norm Eisen of the State Democracy Defenders Fund; and Subodh Chandra of The Chandra Law Firm

For the defendants: Not yet available

Read more:

US judge temporarily blocks Musk's DOGE from accessing payment systems

Union asks judge to block Elon Musk's DOGE from Labor Dept systems