Trump Administration Admits DOGE Staff Accessed Restricted Social Security Data

The Trump administration has acknowledged in a federal court filing that employees from the Elon Musk-run Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) improperly accessed sensitive Social Security data and engaged with a political advocacy group seeking to overturn election results—contradicting earlier assurances to the court.

According to filings submitted by the Justice Department in a case brought by unions representing federal workers, staffers embedded within the Social Security Administration (SSA) violated internal data-access protocols and had broader reach into Americans’ personal information than previously disclosed. The admission corrects earlier statements the government conceded were “not entirely true.”

DOGE Staffers Linked to Election-Fraud Advocacy Group

The filing reveals that two DOGE team members working at the SSA were contacted in March 2025 by a political advocacy group requesting assistance in analyzing state voter rolls. The group’s stated aim, according to the court document, was to uncover evidence of voter fraud and overturn election results in certain states.

One DOGE staffer signed a “Voter Data Agreement” with the group—an agreement that was never reviewed or approved through the SSA’s formal data-sharing process. The SSA only became aware of the agreement months later during an internal review unrelated to the ongoing lawsuit.

As a result, the agency made two formal referrals in December for potential violations of the Hatch Act, which prohibits federal employees from engaging in political activity in their official capacities.

Sensitive Data Access Raises Alarms

The revelations build on earlier whistleblower complaints and reporting that Elon Musk-run DOGE personnel sought—and in some cases obtained—access to one of the federal government’s most sensitive databases. That data reportedly included Americans’ full names, addresses, and birth dates, raising concerns about identity theft and large-scale privacy risks.

Previous disclosures alleged that DOGE staff uploaded copies of SSA data to unapproved cloud servers, creating what whistleblowers described as “enormous vulnerabilities.” While the court filing stops short of confirming full-scale misuse, it acknowledges that access controls were not properly enforced—even under an existing court order limiting DOGE’s reach.

Political Accountability in Question

Critics argue the admissions underscore a deeper governance problem. Enforcement of the Hatch Act ultimately rests with the executive branch, meaning accountability for potential violations would depend on the same administration now conceding the misconduct.

Legal and ethics experts warn that the case highlights the fragility of safeguards meant to separate government data from partisan political efforts—especially when oversight mechanisms fail or are disregarded.

Broader Implications for Trust in Federal Systems

The court filing has been described by multiple observers as a stunning reversal, particularly after the administration previously fought to defend DOGE’s access to SSA systems as part of an anti-fraud initiative.

For millions of Americans whose personal information is housed within Social Security databases, the episode raises urgent questions about data security, political interference, and the limits of executive power over federal agencies.

As the lawsuit continues, the case may set lasting precedents for how far politically aligned “efficiency” teams can go inside the federal bureaucracy—and what happens when they cross the line.