Federal Employees Seek Injunction in DOGE, OPM Privacy Act Case
District Judge Denise Cote on Monday scheduled a hearing for May 29 at 10 a.m. EST to discuss the American Federation of Government Employees' Friday request for a preliminary inunction against the Office of Personnel Management, which would prevent OPM from disclosing records containing sensitive personal information to the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Disclosing such data is a violation of the Privacy Act of 1974 and the Administrative Procedures Act (APA), AFGE alleged at the U.S. District Court for Southern New York.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
“In passing the Privacy Act, Congress chose to protect the privacy of Americans, including government workers,” the current and former government employees said in a court memorandum. “It did so by sharply limiting the power of executive branch agencies to disclose information they collect," it added.
The federation's proposal in case 25-01237 would enjoin OPM from disclosing any department records to DOGE, and requires DOGE to impound and destroy any personal information of government employees that has already been disclosed. OPM would also have to establish appropriate safeguards to ensure records stay safe and confidential.
The government employees said the injunction is necessary “because the longer Defendants are allowed to violate the law, the greater the actual harms suffered by Plaintiffs from disclosure of their data by OPM to DOGE Defendants, who have shown a willingness to retaliate against federal workers.”
“Even without malicious behavior by DOGE, Plaintiffs also are at imminent risk of harm from hacking, leaks, and breaches because of the lack of proper cybersecurity safeguards,” they added.
Cote also said in her Monday order that by May 27, the parties will have met in order to advise the court if there would be any witnesses in attendance at the hearing.
The federation filed the original complaint on Feb. 11, and a motion for a temporary restraining order (TRO) on Feb. 14. DOGE and OPM opposed the TRO on Feb.19 and asked the court to dismiss the case entirely on March 14 (see 2503170044). On April 3, District Judge Denise Cote partially rejected the motion to dismiss, allowing the case to continue (see 2504030060). DOGE and OPM defended their actions and said they were not in violation of the Privacy Act in a court document on April 17 (see 2504180038).