A federal court has issued a significant ruling blocking Elon Musk and a group of employees from accessing sensitive government financial data. The decision comes after a coalition of 19 states filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration and the so-called “Department of Government Efficiency” (DOGE), a temporary organization created by executive order. The lawsuit aimed to prevent unauthorized individuals from obtaining confidential Treasury Department records, including payment systems that manage Social Security benefits, veterans’ benefits, and federal tax refunds.
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York responded swiftly, granting a temporary restraining order that not only prohibits access but also mandates the destruction of any previously downloaded data. The court cited the risk of irreparable harm due to potential leaks of personally identifiable information, including Social Security numbers and bank account details, as well as the increased vulnerability of these systems to hacking.
DOGE, despite its name, is not a formal government agency but rather a temporary group under the Executive Office of the President. Its stated mission is to modernize federal technology and improve efficiency by reducing the federal workforce and cutting costs. However, concerns were raised when its employees were granted access to the Treasury’s Bureau of Fiscal Services, which handles massive financial transactions affecting millions of Americans.
The lawsuit argues that this unprecedented access could be used for political purposes, potentially blocking payments to individuals or groups that do not align with the administration’s agenda. The filing emphasizes that, until recently, only a small number of career civil servants with security clearances had access to this data, ensuring its confidentiality and integrity. That changed when Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent authorized DOGE employees to review the system.
The temporary employees claim that their objective was simply to assess the efficiency of the system. However, state officials argue that this justification is a cover for a more concerning motive: direct control over federal payments. They warn that such access could lead to misuse, data breaches, and political manipulation of federal funds.
The court’s ruling underscores the urgency of these concerns. Judge Paul A. Engelmayer determined that the risk posed by DOGE’s access was too great to ignore. The decision highlights both the potential for unauthorized disclosure of sensitive information and the increased likelihood of security vulnerabilities. As a result, the restraining order ensures that access is revoked and that any previously obtained data is permanently destroyed.
A hearing is scheduled for February 14 in New York, where arguments will be presented on whether the order should be extended or modified. The ruling represents a major legal setback for the Trump administration’s efforts to expand DOGE’s authority and grants a temporary victory to those advocating for stronger protections over government-held financial data.
The case raises broader questions about the boundaries of executive power and the extent to which private individuals, even those working under temporary government initiatives, should be allowed to handle sensitive public information. For now, the ruling ensures that access to the Treasury’s financial records remains tightly controlled while legal proceedings continue.
