The United States Supreme Court gives Dog to sensitive social security data Donald Trump News

The United States Supreme Court sided with the administration of President Donald Trump in two issues on government records – and who must obtain it.

On Friday, the conservative majority consisting of six members of the judgment of the minimum court is limited to the types of data that Trump Ministry of Governmental efficiency (Doug) can arrive through the Social Security Administration (SSA).

In a separate case, the majority also decided that Doge was not required to deliver records under the Freedom of Information Law (FOIA), a government transparency law.

In both cases, the three judges of the Supreme Court-Sony Sotomoor, Kitanji Brown Jackson and Elena Kagan opposed the majority decision.

Dog was at the forefront of Trump’s campaign to re -perceive the federal government and reduced the bureaucratic “bloating”.

unveil On November 13, just eight days after Trump’s re -election, Dog was designed to dismantle the government bureaucracy, reduce excess regulations, reduce wasted expenditures, and restructure federal agencies. “

Initially, it was not clear how Dog would interact with the executive branch: whether it was a consulting committee, a new section or a non -governmental entity.

But on January 20, when Trump was sworn in for for his second term Declare The current American digital service – a technical initiative founded by former President Barack Obama – will be reorganized to create a Dog.

The government efficiency committee has since led a widespread reform of the federal government, the implementation of mass demobilization and the endeavor to close entities such as the United States Agency for International Development (the United States Agency for International Development).

It also announced the costs of the costs it achieved or the alleged fraud that it revealed, although many of these allegations were contradictory or interrogated by journalists and experts.

In addition, the comprehensive changes made by Dog in the federal government made the issue of criticism and anxiety, especially as it requested to increase access to sensitive data and systems.

Until last week, Dog Eleon Musk, a businessman and billionaire technology and was a prominent supporter in an attempt to re -elect Trump. Musk and Trump, however, they had General rupture After the end of the billionaire period as a “private government employee” at the White House.

This fall has left the future of Doug’s uncertainty.

Access to social security data

One of Dog’s controversial initiatives was to push her to Access to social security dataIn the name rooting Waste, fraud and abuse.

Early from Trump’s second state, the President and Musk repeated Disturbed claims Social security payments were made for millions of people who were 150 years or larger. But the facts of the facts quickly refuted this claim.

Instead, they indicated that the Social Security Administration has carried out a symbol to automatically stop payments for anyone who is alive and more than 115 years.

They also indicated that the Cobol programming language announces incomplete entries in the social security system with the birthdays dating back 150 years, which may lead to Trump administration’s confusion. Less than 1 percent of social security payments are made incorrectly, according to the 2024 report.

However, Trump officials criticized the Social Security Administration, as Musk called “the largest Ponzi scheme in all times” and claim to cancel.

In March, the American boycott judge, Ellen Leipton Holland Dog, prevented unrestricted access to social security data, citing the sensitive nature of this information.

Social Security numbers, for example, are the key to verifying a person’s identity in the United States, and the issuance of such numbers may endanger individual privacy.

Lipton Hollande has eliminated that Dog did not specify or even explain one reason that the DOGE team needs unlimited access to SSA full registration systems.

“Instead, the government is simply repeated the need to update the system and detect fraud,” she wrote in her decision. “The way to do this is like hitting a fly with a heavy hammer.”

However, the judge’s ruling allowed Doge to display unidentified data, without specifying information personally.

However, the Trump administration has appealed this decision before the Supreme Court, on the pretext that Judge Leipton Hollande has exceeded its authority to prevent Dog’s arrival.

The Supreme Court granted its emergency seam on Friday, as Lipton Holland’s temporary restrictions raised the data in an unexpected decision.

But Judge Brown Jackson issued a continental opposition (Pdf), Which indicates that the Supreme Court was ready to break the rules to assist the presidency, which was not ready to allow legal challenges to play in the minimum courts.

“Once again, this court places emergency response equipment, continues to the scene, and uses its fair power for the fire fan instead of extinguishing it,” said Brown Jackson.

She said that the Trump administration has not proven that any “irreplaceable damage” would happen if Duj is temporarily prevented from accessing social security data.

However, by granting the emergency contact to the Trump administration, she said that the court “abandoned subtle judicial decisions and creating serious special risks to millions of Americans in this process.”

Do you subject to transparency laws?

The second Supreme Court’s decision on Friday relates to whether Doug himself must hand the documents under federal transparency laws.

The question was raised as part of a lawsuit filed by citizens on responsibility and morals in Washington (crew), a government monitoring group.

He has argued that Dog’s sweeping powers indicate that they should be subject to laws such as the Freedom of Information Law, just like any other executive agency. But the crew also claimed that the ambiguity surrounding Dog’s structures had kept isolated from external investigations.

The crew said in a statement.

The International Energy Agency Group has sought to force DOGE to provide information about its internal work.

While the US provincial judge was standing at a crew request for records in April, the Supreme Court on Friday stopped the minimum decision of the court (Pdf). He sent the case to the Court of Appeal for more study, with instructions to narrow the April order.

“Any investigation on whether the entity is an agency for the purposes of the Freedom of Information Law cannot manage the entity’s ability to persuade,” the conservative majority of the Supreme Court ruled.

He also said that the courts needed to practice “respect and control” in relation to “internal” executive communications.