The Trump administration can’t catch a break. The courts are hitting them with a barrage.
And now an Obama judge has hit the Trump administration with another surprise ruling.
Another Leftist Judge
On March 20, 2025, a federal judge’s ruling sent shockwaves through the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), an initiative spearheaded by Elon Musk to streamline federal operations. Judge Ellen Lipton Hollander, appointed by former President Barack Obama, issued a temporary restraining order that halted DOGE’s access to Social Security Administration (SSA) data. From the vantage point of the judicial branch, this decision paints a picture of an institution positioning itself as an activist gatekeeper rather than a coequal partner with the executive and legislative branches.
The crux of Judge Hollander’s ruling lies in her skepticism of DOGE’s intentions. She asserted that the team lacked a clear justification for requiring what she described as “unlimited access” to SSA records. “The DOGE Team is essentially engaged in a fishing expedition at SSA, in search of a fraud epidemic, based on little more than suspicion,” she wrote.
“It has launched a search for the proverbial needle in the haystack, without any concrete knowledge that the needle is actually in the haystack.” This language suggests that the judiciary views DOGE’s mission as overreach, casting doubt on the executive branch’s authority to investigate its own systems without what the court deems sufficient cause.
Hollander further criticized the government’s rationale, stating that it “simply repeats its incantation of a need to modernize the system and uncover fraud” without providing a detailed explanation for its data access needs. She likened DOGE’s approach to “hitting a fly with a sledgehammer,” implying a disproportionate and reckless strategy that the judicial branch feels compelled to rein in. The temporary restraining order she issued prohibits the SSA and Treasury from granting access to “any DOGE Affiliate,” a term so expansive that it has left SSA leadership scrambling to interpret its scope.
🚨 BREAKING: Maryland federal judge blocks DOGE from accessing Social Security systems, says Elon Musk's group is simply on a "fishing expedition" - POLITICO
— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) March 20, 2025
Judge Ellen Hollander is an Obama-appointee. pic.twitter.com/36hWGCDDv2
Acting SSA head Leland Dudek, in an interview with Bloomberg, expressed the practical fallout of this judicial intervention. “My anti-fraud team would be DOGE affiliates. My IT staff would be DOGE affiliates,” Dudek told Bloomberg. “As it stands, I will follow it exactly and terminate access by all SSA employees to our IT systems.” His statement reveals the ripple effect of the court’s decision, which some might argue demonstrates the judiciary’s willingness to flex its muscle in a way that hampers the executive branch’s ability to function.
The legal battle stems from a lawsuit filed in February by labor unions and advocacy groups, supported by the left-leaning Democracy Forward, which sought to block DOGE’s access to SSA data. Their argument hinges on the SSA’s duty to “protect the sensitive personal and financial information that they collect and maintain about individuals from unnecessary and unlawful disclosure.” The plaintiffs contend that sharing data with DOGE violates this obligation, a position the judiciary appears to take seriously enough to issue the TRO.
In response, the government pushed back in a filing, arguing that the plaintiffs’ case rests on a shaky foundation. “In sum, the entirety of Plaintiffs’ Motion relies on one claim: that it’s unlawful for one employee of a federal agency to share information with another authorized federal employee specifically for the purpose of carrying out an Executive Order of the President,” the government wrote. “That claim cannot be correct.” This defense frames the issue as a straightforward matter of interagency cooperation under executive authority—a perspective the judicial branch seems poised to challenge.
Adding context to the dispute, SSA Chief Information Officer Michael Russo provided an affidavit detailing the agency’s approach. “The agency has provided read-only access to copies of production data which does not allow modification or deletion of the underlying data,” he wrote.
“This level of access provides no access to SSA production automation, code, or configuration files, and provides no avenues to alter the function of SSA production systems. This level of access ensures these employees can review records needed to detect fraud but does not allow them the ability to make any changes to beneficiary data or payment files.” Russo’s explanation outlines a cautious, limited access framework designed to balance fraud detection with data security—yet it failed to sway Judge Hollander.
From this vantage point, the judiciary’s actions suggest a stance of superiority rather than partnership. By issuing a sweeping order that disrupts the SSA’s operations and questioning the executive branch’s motives, the court appears to be staking out a role as the ultimate arbiter of governmental propriety. Whether this move strengthens accountability or stifles efficiency remains a point of contention, but it undeniably tilts the balance of power, at least temporarily, toward the bench.
The Federalist Wire will keep you updated on any further reports about this ongoing legal battle.
