Supreme Court Hands Trump Administration Two Key Wins for DOGE

by Worthy News Washington D.C. Bureau Staff

(Worthy News) – The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday handed down two emergency rulings that mark significant victories for President Donald Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), reinstating its access to sensitive Social Security data and shielding it from intrusive document disclosures sought by a liberal watchdog group.

In a pair of unsigned 6-3 orders, the conservative-majority Court sided with the Trump administration in cases that have drawn fire from Democrats, labor unions, and privacy advocates — and highlighted growing tensions over the expanding role of DOGE, the White House’s controversial initiative aimed at rooting out government waste and inefficiency.

Victory One: DOGE Gains Access to Social Security Data

The first ruling lifted a block imposed by Senior U.S. District Judge Ellen Lipton Hollander of Maryland, who had halted DOGE’s access to Social Security Administration (SSA) databases in March. That preliminary injunction, extended in April, was upheld by the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals — prompting Solicitor General D. John Sauer to appeal directly to the Supreme Court.

The justices granted the emergency request, citing the government’s likelihood of success and arguing that any delay would hinder executive functions. The majority opinion concluded that DOGE may “proceed to afford members of the SSA DOGE Team access to the agency records in question in order for those members to do their work.”

The ruling allows DOGE staffers, under acting SSA Commissioner Leland Dudek, to resume their investigation into alleged fraud and inefficiency using personally identifiable data such as Social Security numbers, earnings histories, and medical records. Dissenting justices Elena Kagan, Ketanji Brown Jackson, and Sonia Sotomayor objected, warning of grave privacy implications and accusing the Court of granting special treatment to the administration.

Jackson, writing for the dissent, condemned the decision for “jettisoning careful judicial decisionmaking and creating grave privacy risks for millions of Americans in the process.”

Victory Two: Supreme Court Narrows FOIA Discovery Against DOGE

In a second case, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) v. DOGE, the Supreme Court halted a discovery order issued by U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper in a FOIA-related lawsuit. CREW had sought internal records from DOGE, including staff rosters, terminated contracts, and a deposition of DOGE official John Gleason, as part of an effort to determine if DOGE qualifies as a federal agency subject to FOIA.

While the D.C. Circuit had upheld the lower court’s discovery order, Chief Justice John Roberts referred the case to the full Court. The majority found the order overly broad and warned it could intrude on the constitutional separation of powers. The Court returned the case to the lower court with instructions to narrow the scope of discovery.

DOGE argued that complying with the order would compromise executive confidentiality and disrupt internal deliberations. CREW, in response, vowed to continue its legal efforts, stating, “We look forward to continuing to litigate this case to ensure that the American people have open access to records showing how their government is being run.”

Political Reactions

Supporters of the Trump administration hailed the rulings as pivotal victories for transparency and efficiency in government operations.

“Now we’re REALLY going to find some MASSIVE evidence of waste, fraud, and abuse,” conservative commentator Nick Sortor wrote on X.

Curt Levey, president of the Committee for Justice, said the rulings are a welcome pushback against what he called “activist judges” attempting to obstruct the administration’s reforms. “This lawsuit is a classic example of the lawfare being waged to stop DOGE,” Levey told Townhall.

Democrats, however, were alarmed. House Minority Whip Katherine Clark (D-MA) accused the Court of opening the door to massive privacy violations. “Your Social Security number. Your medical history. Your finances. All in the hands of unqualified, unelected — and unaccountable — officials,” Clark warned.

Broader Context

These decisions come amid a wave of litigation aimed at DOGE, a controversial unit once championed by former White House advisor Elon Musk. While Musk has since parted ways with the administration, DOGE continues its mission to overhaul bureaucratic inefficiencies — and remains a lightning rod for critics who question its oversight and legal status.

The lawsuits reflect deeper tensions over the Trump administration’s executive reach and its use of emergency legal maneuvers to advance its agenda. Both rulings were part of the Court’s increasingly active emergency docket, where decisions are issued swiftly and often without the need for oral arguments.

As the Court approaches the end of its term, these back-to-back victories have bolstered the Trump administration’s efforts to reshape how the federal government operates — and may set lasting precedents for executive authority in the digital age.

Copyright 1999-2025 Worthy News. This article was originally published on Worthy News and was reproduced with permission.