Log in
Washington, District of Columbia
In a victory for data privacy, a federal court in New York definitively ruled that the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) violated the law when it disclosed millions of federal employee records to DOGE agents. In a summary judgment ruling issued on October 20, 2026, the court found that OPM violated two provisions of the Privacy Act—one restricting disclosure of personal records between agencies and another requiring agencies to protect the security and confidentiality of records.
Since the case was filed, many DOGE agents have left the government and OPM has rescinded their database access. However, OPM should still clean up the cybersecurity mess it created. The court will decide the remedy at a later date.
"By virtue of the Court’s summary judgment ruling, OPM’s decision to grant DOGE Agents broad access to its systems of recordings containing [personally identifiable information (PII)] has been held unlawful," Judge Denise Cote wrote.
"The record also provides no support for a finding that it was the pursuit of a modernization agenda that prompted OPM to grant sweeping and expedited access to a score of DOGE Agents to its systems of records containing PII," she added.
OPM maintains databases of highly sensitive personal information about tens of millions of federal employees, retirees, and job applicants. Starting in January 2025, OPM disclosed data to the U.S. DOGE Service, initially led by Elon Musk. This disclosure violates the federal Privacy Act of 1974, a watershed anti-surveillance statute that prevents the federal government from abusing our personal information.
EFF sued OPM and DOGE because this data disclosure violates the Privacy Act. We represent unions of federal employees – the American Federation of Government Employees and the Association of Administrative Law Judges – and individual employees. We seek injunctive and declaratory relief. We filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
Our co-counsel are Lex Lumina LLP, State Democracy Defenders Fund, and The Chandra Law Firm LLC.
Support Privacy & Government Accountability
reply
One of the most common libertarian-adjacent anti-government arguments - or, uh, argument-like gestures (non-derogatory) - is: Boy, the DMV sure does suck! Or, if you prefer, Reagan’s old line about hearing that someone is from the government and here to help. The government is bad at doing things, its works are expensive and inefficient, everything it touches turns to shit. Sensible people will want to avoid engaging with it, and avoid sinking resources into it, as much as possible.
And there are obviously elements of truth to this, if you’re discoursing in good faith, although it’s just as obvious that the government regularly works miracles that go unappreciated because they get immediately folded into the status quo.
There has been a lot of talk, of late, about the growing popularity of socialism, and the way that all the kids treat “capitalism” as a dirty word, and the general contempt for private enterprise, etc. etc. Much of that talk has come from people who regard this as very bad and want to put a stop to it.
I respectfully submit: a large part of what’s going on is, well, enshittification. It’s increasingly noticeable that all the businesses with whom you interact are focused on extracting money from you in exchange for as little as possible. Quality sucks across the board. Customer service sucks. Shrinkflation, planned obsolescence, etc. etc.
Sensible people will want to avoid engaging with that, and avoid sinking resources into it, as much as possible!
And, yes, it’s true that business has also repeatedly given us marvelous miracles in recent years, and that those miracles go unappreciated because they get immediately folded into the status quo. But stomping your feet, and insisting that you don’t get enough appreciation for all that you do, is not a winning strategy in the arena of public opinion.
People who want to rehabilitate capitalism really might want to think about doing what it takes to fix the current culture of business.
“Reduction of consumer surplus,” in econ terms.
So here’s the plan: every company is either a startup or a chaebol. If you’re a startup you get to move fast and break things, invent new products, innovate your processes, remove your processes, create new products, deprecate old ones, lower prices, raise prices, eliminate the entire concept of prices, etc. Your shareholders will probably lose everything and your company will go bankrupt, but there’s a small chance that you all become billionaires.
If you’re a chaebol then you are part of a government-enforced oligopoly and everything you do involves infinite bureaucracy and is guaranteed to be basically the same forever. You cannot change your prices without an act of Congress, you cannot mothball old products, you cannot substantially change the products you already offer without signoff from 57 government regulators. You will not maximize shareholder value. You will not delight your customers. You will also not annoy them by enshittifying a product that they’re used to. You will provide modest, mostly-predictable returns to your customers and a well-understood palette of the same products at the same quality for ever and ever.
Occasionally a startup will become very successful. At some well-defined revenue threshold (somewhere around $10B), you are legally required to stop being a startup and become a chaebol instead, with all of the implications listed above. Everyone understands this, and when you cross the threshold you will have an official ceremony with the head of the SEC, shake hands with your new regulatory best buddies, and be invited into the secret group chat with all of the other chaebol oligarchs. Everyone in the business will understand that the exciting times are over and everything from here on out is following procedures and obeying regulations, and the customers will understand that whatever the product is now is what it will be for the rest of time.
I agree to your terms.
Washington, District of Columbia
Washington, District of Columbia
Washington, District of Columbia
One of the most common libertarian-adjacent anti-government arguments - or, uh, argument-like gestures (non-derogatory) - is: Boy, the DMV sure does suck! Or, if you prefer, Reagan’s old line about hearing that someone is from the government and here to help. The government is bad at doing things, its works are expensive and inefficient, everything it touches turns to shit. Sensible people will want to avoid engaging with it, and avoid sinking resources into it, as much as possible.
And there are obviously elements of truth to this, if you’re discoursing in good faith, although it’s just as obvious that the government regularly works miracles that go unappreciated because they get immediately folded into the status quo.
There has been a lot of talk, of late, about the growing popularity of socialism, and the way that all the kids treat “capitalism” as a dirty word, and the general contempt for private enterprise, etc. etc. Much of that talk has come from people who regard this as very bad and want to put a stop to it.
I respectfully submit: a large part of what’s going on is, well, enshittification. It’s increasingly noticeable that all the businesses with whom you interact are focused on extracting money from you in exchange for as little as possible. Quality sucks across the board. Customer service sucks. Shrinkflation, planned obsolescence, etc. etc.
Sensible people will want to avoid engaging with that, and avoid sinking resources into it, as much as possible!
And, yes, it’s true that business has also repeatedly given us marvelous miracles in recent years, and that those miracles go unappreciated because they get immediately folded into the status quo. But stomping your feet, and insisting that you don’t get enough appreciation for all that you do, is not a winning strategy in the arena of public opinion.
People who want to rehabilitate capitalism really might want to think about doing what it takes to fix the current culture of business.
Washington, District of Columbia
Next Page of Stories