A federal judge has ruled that the Department of Government Efficiency will retain access to sensitive data held by certain federal agencies, despite efforts by labor unions to block that access through legal action.
Judge John D. Bates of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia declined a request for a preliminary injunction that would have restricted DOGE’s involvement with private records maintained by the Department of Labor and the Department of Health and Human Services.
Labor organizations, including the AFL-CIO, filed a lawsuit earlier this year aimed at stopping DOGE personnel from reviewing confidential materials such as medical information, financial records, Social Security details, and home addresses.
In his written opinion, Judge Bates stated that the plaintiffs failed to show enough immediate harm to justify issuing an injunction. He noted that courts require proof of likely and irreversible harm before halting government actions on an interim basis.
The judge expressed concern about the nature of the information involved but emphasized that fears alone do not satisfy the legal standards required for injunctive relief. He added that the court remains prepared to act if future findings support the unions’ claims.
Judge Bates wrote that the data being handled by DOGE employees is among the most sensitive the government possesses, and the court is aware of the seriousness of granting access to such information.
While declining to issue an injunction, the judge instructed both parties to develop a proposed schedule for resolving the case through summary judgment. This process would allow the court to determine the outcome based on legal arguments and evidence without a full trial.
The decision marks another legal setback for the unions, who have previously failed in attempts to secure temporary restraining orders related to DOGE’s operations, according to The Hill.
Judge Bates has ruled on several high-profile matters involving President Trump’s administration. In past cases, he ordered the restoration of government websites and found one of Trump’s executive orders to be unconstitutional.
Litigation surrounding DOGE’s access to government-held personal data continues to unfold across multiple federal courts. The current ruling does not affect related cases moving through the judiciary.
In a separate legal matter, a different federal judge recently ordered the government to submit a report on DOGE’s access to personal information held by the Office of Personnel Management. That order came in response to a separate lawsuit brought by the AFL-CIO.
The Supreme Court also weighed in on a similar dispute earlier this month. It lifted a lower court’s injunction that had blocked DOGE activity at the Social Security Administration. That case was brought by the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees.
The legal challenges reflect growing concern among public sector unions over DOGE’s role and its authority to handle highly personal information. More rulings are expected as these cases advance.
