Recently, U.S. district courts have received three complaints challenging DOGE’s access to sensitive consumer data. The first of these complaints was filed on February 10 by a privacy and civil liberties-focused nonprofit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. The nonprofit’s complaint alleged OPM and the Treasury have “allowed the unlawful misuse of critical data systems” by DOGE, exposing sensitive personal data stored on those systems. The complaint described this activity as “the largest and most consequential data breach in U.S. history.” The complaint alleged DOGE’s access to this data violated the APA, the Privacy Act of 1974, and the Fifth Amendment, among other claims.

On February 11, a group of five federal employees filed a putative class action complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, making similar allegations to those raised by the nonprofit. Specifically, the employees alleged OPM and Treasury provided unauthorized and unlawful access to sensitive personal, health and financial information of federal employees to DOGE. The employees seek to represent a class of all current, former and prospective federal employees whose sensitive personal information was accessed without prior written authorization from OPM and the Treasury. The employees’ complaint alleged violations of the Privacy Act of 1974.

Finally, on February 11, a coalition of labor unions and worker groups filed an amended complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, raising similar allegations. The plaintiffs’ amended complaint alleged DOGE had unlawfully accessed sensitive information systems without proper authorization, threatening the privacy rights of Americans. The amended complaint added allegations that DOGE’s access to systems maintained by the Department of Health and Human Services and the CFPB, in addition to those maintained by the Department of Labor (as alleged in the original complaint), was unlawful. The complaint alleged that sensitive personal data about private citizens held by each of these agencies was unlawfully disclosed to DOGE. The plaintiffs’ complaint alleged violations of the Privacy Act of 1974 and the APA and now seeks injunctive relief barring DOGE from accessing personal data held by these agencies.