DOGE team can access Social Security systems, US Supreme Court rules
The Supreme Court cleared the way Friday for the Department of Government Efficiency to access Social Security systems containing personal data on millions of Americans.
The court majority sided with the Trump administration in its first Supreme Court appeal involving DOGE, the team once led by billionaire Elon Musk. The three liberal justices dissented.
The high court halted an order from a judge in Maryland restricting the team's access to the Social Security Administration under federal privacy laws.
The agency holds sensitive data on nearly everyone in the country, including school records, salary details and medical information.
The Trump administration says DOGE needs access to carry out its mission of targeting waste and fraud in the federal government. Musk had been focused on Social Security as an alleged hotbed of fraud. The billionaire entrepreneur, who has stepped back from his work with DOGE, has described it as a ' Ponzi scheme ' and insisted that reducing waste in the program is an important way to cut government spending.
U.S. District Judge Ellen Hollander in Maryland found that DOGE's efforts at Social Security amounted to a 'fishing expedition' based on 'little more than suspicion' of fraud, and allowing unfettered access puts Americans' private information at risk.
Her ruling did allow access to anonymous data for staffers who have undergone training and background checks, or wider access for those who have detailed a specific need.
The Trump administration has said DOGE can't work effectively with those restrictions.
Solicitor General John Sauer also argued that the ruling is an example of federal judges overstepping their authority and trying to micromanage executive branch agencies.
The plaintiffs say it's a narrow order that's urgently needed to protect personal information.
An appeals court previously refused to immediately to lift the block on DOGE access, though it split along ideological lines. Conservative judges in the minority said there's no evidence that the team has done any 'targeted snooping' or exposed personal information.
The lawsuit was originally filed by a group of labor unions and retirees represented by the group Democracy Forward. It's one of more than two dozen lawsuits filed over DOGE's work, which has included deep cuts at federal agencies and large-scale layoffs.
The nation's court system has been ground zero for pushback to President Donald Trump's sweeping conservative agenda, with about 200 lawsuits filed challenging policies on everything from immigration to education to mass layoffs of federal workers.
Mass. weather: Weekend could bring flash floods, thunderstorms in some areas
Karen Read trial: Key takeaways from week 7 as the retrial begins to wind down
Recall alert: These window air conditioners could cause mold exposure
Suspect in wrong-way crash that killed Endicott College sergeant extradited to NH
Judge throws out 'unfunded mandate' lawsuits over MBTA Communities Act
Read the original article on MassLive.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Judge turns back challenge to MBTA housing law; Holden among plaintiffs
Superior Court ruling dismissing MBTA Communities unfunded mandate challenge by Michael Elfland on Scribd A Superior Court judge on Friday tossed a lawsuit brought by nine municipalities challenging the MBTA Communities Act, ruling that the controversial zoning-reform law is not an unfunded mandate. Plymouth Superior Court Justice Mark Gildea granted the Healey administration's motion to dismiss the latest challenges to the 2021 law, which supporters see as a key tool to spur development of much-needed housing in more than 170 eastern Massachusetts cities and towns. Marshfield, Middleton, Hanson, Holden, Hamilton, Duxbury, Wenham, Weston and Wrentham had each filed legal complaints against the law in recent months, contending that it should not be enforceable after the Division of Local Mandates in Auditor Diana DiZoglio's office deemed the measure an unfunded mandate. More: Holden seeks short-term halt to MBTA housing law Plaintiffs said allowing multifamily housing by right in at least one reasonably sized zone as the law requires could force them to absorb significant new infrastructure costs with no state assistance. But Gildea concluded the possible costs are "indirect," which means the law is not an unfunded mandate, and that grant programs are available to help shoulder some of the burden. "Even if [the law] was an unfunded mandate, the Municipalities have failed to allege sufficient facts concerning any anticipated amounts associated with future infrastructure costs beyond a speculative level," Gildea wrote in a 40-page decision. Some of the plaintiffs laid out their own issues with the law as well, such as Middleton arguing that it should not be classified as an MBTA community and therefore should not be subject to the mandatory zoning reforms. Jason Talerman, an attorney for some of the towns, said in an email that plaintiffs are "disappointed with the result and find the decision to be contrary to applicable law." Most of the 177 communities subject to the law have approved new zoning reforms, putting them in compliance, according to the Healey administration. In January, the Supreme Judicial Court upheld the MBTA Communities Act as a constitutional law the attorney general can enforce with legal action. The high court required the Healey administration to redo the regulation-setting process. This article originally appeared on Telegram & Gazette: Judge turns back challenge to MBTA housing law
Associated Press
32 minutes ago
- Associated Press
What it would take to convert a jet from Qatar into Air Force One to safely fly Trump
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump really wants to fly on an upgraded Air Force One — but making that happen could depend on whether he's willing to cut corners with security. As government lawyers sort out the legal arrangement for accepting a luxury jet from the Qatari royal family, another crucial conversation is unfolding about modifying the plane so it's safe for the American president. Installing capabilities equivalent to the decades-old 747s now used as Air Force One would almost certainly consign the project to a similar fate as Boeing's replacement initiative, which has been plagued by delays and cost overruns. Air Force Secretary Troy Meink told lawmakers Thursday that those security modifications would cost less than $400 million but provided no details. Satisfying Trump's desire to use the new plane before the end of his term could require leaving out some of those precautions, however. A White House official said Trump wants the Qatari jet ready as soon as possible while adhering to security standards. The official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, did not provide details on equipment issues or the timeline. Trump has survived two assassination attempts, and Iran allegedly also plotted to kill him, so he's well aware of the danger he faces. However, he seems willing to take some chances with security, particularly when it comes to communications. For example, he likes to keep his personal phone handy despite the threat of hacks. He boasted this week that the government got the jet 'for free,' saying, 'We need it as Air Force One until the other ones are done.' Here's a look at what it would take to make the Qatari plane into a presidential transport: What makes a plane worthy of being Air Force One? Air Force One is the call sign for any plane that's carrying the president. The first aircraft to get the designation was a propeller-powered C-54 Skymaster, which ferried Franklin D. Roosevelt to the Yalta Conference in 1945. It featured a conference room with a bulletproof window. Things are a lot more complicated these days. Boeing has spent years stripping down and rebuilding two 747s to replace the versions that have carried presidents for more than three decades. The project is slated to cost more than $5.3 billion and may not be finished before Trump leaves office. A 2021 report made public through the Freedom of Information Act outlines the unclassified requirements for the replacement 747s under construction. At the top of the list — survivability and communications. The government decided more than a decade ago that the new planes had to have four engines so they could remain airborne if one or two fail, said Deborah Lee James, who was Air Force secretary at the time. That creates a challenge because 747s are no longer manufactured, which could make spare parts harder to come by. Air Force One also has to have the highest level of classified communications, anti-jamming capabilities and external protections against foreign surveillance, so the president can securely command military forces and nuclear weapons during a national emergency. It's an extremely sensitive and complex system, including video, voice and data transmissions. James said there are anti-missile measures and shielding against radiation or an electromagnetic pulse that could be caused by a nuclear blast. 'The point is, it remains in flight no matter what,' she said. Will Trump want all the security bells and whistles? If the Qatari plane is retrofitted to presidential standards, it could cost $1.5 billion and take years, according to a U.S. official who spoke on the condition of anonymity to provide details that aren't publicly available. Testifying before Congress this week, Meink discounted such estimates, arguing that some of the costs associated with retrofitting the Qatari plane would have been spent anyway as the Air Force moves to build the long-delayed new presidential planes, including buying aircraft for training and to have spares available if needed. In response, Rep. Joe Courtney, D-Conn., said that based on the contract costs for the planes that the Air Force is building, it would cost about $1 billion to strip down the Qatar plane, install encrypted communications, harden its defenses and make other required upgrades. James said simply redoing the wiring means 'you'd have to break that whole thing wide open and almost start from scratch.' Trump, as commander in chief, could waive some of these requirements. He could decide to skip shielding systems from an electromagnetic pulse, leaving his communications more vulnerable in case of a disaster but shaving time off the project. After all, Boeing has already scaled back its original plans for the new 747s. Their range was trimmed by 1,200 nautical miles, and the ability to refuel while airborne was scrapped. Paul Eckloff, a former leader of protection details at the Secret Service, expects the president would get the final say. 'The Secret Service's job is to plan for and mitigate risk,' he said. 'It can never eliminate it.' If Trump does waive some requirements, James said that should be kept under wraps because 'you don't want to advertise to your potential adversaries what the vulnerabilities of this new aircraft might be.' It's unlikely that Trump will want to skimp on the plane's appearance. He keeps a model of a new Air Force One in the Oval Office, complete with a darker color scheme that echoes his personal jet instead of the light blue design that's been used for decades. What happens next? Trump toured the Qatari plane in February when it was parked at an airport near Mar-a-Lago, his Florida resort. Air Force chief of staff Gen. David Allvin was there, too. The U.S. official said the jet needs maintenance but not more than what would be expected of a four-engine plane of its complexity. Sen. Tammy Duckworth, an Illinois Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said it would be irresponsible to put the president and national security equipment aboard the Qatari plane 'without knowing that the aircraft is fully capable of withstanding a nuclear attack.' 'It's a waste of taxpayer dollars,' she said. Meanwhile, Boeing's project has been hampered by stress corrosion cracks on the planes and excessive noise in the cabins from the decompression system, among other issues that have delayed delivery, according to a Government Accountability Office report released last year. Boeing referred questions to the Air Force, which said in a statement that it's working with the aircraft manufacturer to find ways to accelerate the delivery of at least one of the 747s. Even so, the aircraft will have to be tested and flown in real-world conditions to ensure no other issues. James said it remains to be seen how Trump would handle any of those challenges. 'The normal course of business would say there could be delays in certifications,' she said. 'But things seem to get waived these days when the president wants it.' ___ AP writer Lolita C. Baldor in Washington contributed to this report.
Business Insider
32 minutes ago
- Business Insider
How to dismiss a high-profile employee without a Trump-Musk-style meltdown
Star talent can be hard to retain — and even harder to let go. The public fallout between President Donald Trump and Elon Musk this week may be an extreme example of a hotshot's exit going off the rails, but leadership experts said it underscores just how dicey it can be to part ways with a high-profile team member. "These are folks with big egos," Peter Cappelli, a management professor at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School, told Business Insider. "Most of the time they end up in court." Saying goodbye to a prominent employee doesn't have to be dramatic. But don't assume a beefy severance package and a non-disparagement agreement are enough to leave a company unscathed. "If people want to hurt you, they'll find a way to do it," Cappelli said. "Ask divorced couples." How to sever ties with a high-profile recruit When pushing out a high-flyer, employers should frame the person's departure as business as usual, said Ronald Placone, a communications professor at Carnegie Mellon University's Tepper School of Business "You try to normalize it," he said. "Things happen, people move on." Trump initially followed conventional wisdom in how he went about booting Musk from Washington last month. The president orchestrated a warm and fuzzy public send-off, thanking Musk for his service and providing a sensible explanation for his departure—in this case, that the billionaire was going back to focusing on his work at the multiple companies he helms. More common explanations are that the fired individual has decided to pursue other career opportunities, spend time with family, or engage in philanthropic endeavors. This tactic is aimed at protecting both the departee's reputation and that of the employer showing him or her the door. "They come up with a story," said Anna A. Tavis, chair of the human capital management department at New York University's School of Professional Studies. The goal is to avoid hurting the outgoing hotshot's chances of landing a new gig and the company's ability to find a replacement. "It's a question of, how do we save face?" she said. Give people something else to talk about Employers should also aim to draw people's attention elsewhere, Placone said. "One of Trump's strategies that often works is you just flood communication channels with other stuff, stuff you perceive is more favorable to your organization," he said. "You try to take some control by giving as many potential stories as possible so people don't home in on one." Trump did make some big announcements this week, including travel bans on several African countries, but leadership experts say the president also erred by openly rebuking Musk's harsh criticism of his signature tax bill on X. This kicked off the back-and-forth squabble that captured the world's attention on Thursday. "There's no need for that," Placone said. "In these high-profile situations, you want to say as little as possible. You don't want to add weight to the argument the other is putting forth." If Trump instead kept quiet, Musk would have been more likely to stick with critiquing the bill rather than upping the ante by accusing the president of illicit behavior, he said. "It would've eventually fizzled out," Placone said. Why some A-list hires don't last Employers most commonly end up quickly sacking flashy new recruits because they aren't as talented as advertised or they insist on working in a way that doesn't align with a company's culture, Tavis said. It even happens at the very top of the corporate ladder. For example, in recent years, the chief executives of Barnes & Noble, Starbucks, and CNN were pushed out of their jobs after brief tenures. "A lot of times they're overestimating their value," she said of people with a reputation for being above the fray, adding that due to the current tight labor market, notable departures are likely to increase. Sam Faycurry, CEO of artificial-intelligence and nutrition startup Fay in San Francisco, can relate. Last year, he hired a well-known rainmaker after a lengthy courtship only to quickly conclude that the person wasn't a good fit. To avoid bad blood, Faycurry said he tried making it seem as if it was the individual's decision to leave by pointing out how much they disagreed on core principles. "This person ended up exiting themselves" without any hard feelings, Faycurry said, adding that he was relieved because his main concern was being able to refill the position with a better-aligned A-list professional. "If the person is influential in a talent pool you want to recruit people from in the future, there's no benefit to having a relationship fall out," Faycurry said. "You're never truly parting ways."
