A U.S. judge has allowed a member of Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) limited access to sensitive Treasury data, under strict conditions. The ruling slightly eases a previous ban amid ongoing privacy concerns raised by Democratic state attorneys general.
Background of the Ruling
On Friday, Judge Jeannette A. Vargas of New York relaxed a previous court-ordered ban that had barred Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from accessing sensitive data held by the U.S. Treasury Department. The decision allows one specific DOGE member, Ryan Wunderly, conditional access to payment and personal data systems after completing official training and submitting a financial disclosure.
Lawsuit over Privacy and Oversight
This legal action stems from a lawsuit brought by 19 Democratic state attorneys general. They raised concerns that DOGE—a Musk-led initiative focused on government efficiency—includes politically appointed staff not properly trained to handle sensitive government information. The lawsuit alleged that DOGE posed a threat to citizens’ privacy due to access to confidential financial data such as Social Security and bank account numbers.
DOGE’s Intended Role
The Department of Government Efficiency, established under Musk’s oversight, is tasked with identifying and eliminating wasteful spending within federal agencies. The initiative has been controversial, attracting both praise for aiming to reduce government costs and criticism for potentially overstepping traditional bureaucratic safeguards.
Conditions of Access
The court’s updated order allows Ryan Wunderly to access Treasury systems—containing personally identifiable and financial data—only after he undergoes training equivalent to what Treasury employees receive. He must also file a financial disclosure report, in line with standard security procedures for federal civil servants.
Public and Political Response
The partial reversal of the ban reflects growing tension between innovation-driven oversight initiatives and established institutional procedures. While Musk’s supporters hail DOGE as a necessary reform tool, critics argue it risks politicizing sensitive governmental functions that require nonpartisan and professional handling.
What’s Next?
With the court’s decision now in effect, the debate is expected to continue, particularly as DOGE expands its review of other government departments. Further legal challenges or regulatory scrutiny may follow, especially as the 2026 midterms approach and federal oversight remains a politically charged issue.
COMMENTS