On February 28, the Department of Labor, the CFPB, and the DHHS (the defendants), filed a motion to dismiss in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, and a week later, a coalition of labor unions (the plaintiffs), filed their response. As previously covered by InfoBytes, this case was one of three by labor unions seeking to halt DOGE’s actions. Specifically, the plaintiffs argued that granting DOGE with personnel access violated the Privacy Act and the APA, seeking a declaratory judgment to prevent DOGE from accessing sensitive information within agency systems. They requested an injunction for DOGE personnel to return or destroy unlawfully accessed records and comply with disclosure laws.

The plaintiffs argued DOGE lacks statutory authority to access sensitive systems containing personal, financial and medical data, while the defendants maintained such access falls under presidential oversight powers. After two failed attempts to secure temporary restraining orders — where the court found the plaintiffs unlikely to succeed on claims that DOGE staff were “running rampant” or violating privacy laws (covered here) — the plaintiffs now advanced five causes of action seeking to block and reverse DOGE’s system access.

The plaintiffs asserted standing based on their roles in protecting member data and overseeing agency operations, arguing DOGE’s actions constitute reviewable agency rulemaking despite the policies not being publicly disclosed. They contended that DOGE’s attempts to exercise authority over federal agencies were “quintessentially ultra vires” since no statute created DOGE or granted it powers beyond advising the president. Further, the plaintiffs alleged the access policies violate the Privacy Act, which prohibits disclosure of any record to any person, or to an agency, other than pursuant to a written request by or with the prior consent of the individual to whom the record pertains. The defendants countered the plaintiffs’ complaint lacks proper standing and fails to allege valid APA claims, moving to dismiss the case while maintaining DOGE’s activities fall within legitimate presidential oversight of executive agencies.