Via Credit Union Data Breach Alert: Issued by Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP
PLEASE CLICK HERE TO SUBMIT YOUR CONTACT INFORMATION
NEW YORK and CHICAGO, March 02, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP, a preeminent national consumer rights law firm, is investigating claims on behalf of customers who have been impacted by the Via Credit Union data breach.
Via Credit Union, headquartered in Marion, Indiana, announced that the personal information of customers may have been stolen as part of a recent data breach involving their systems.
ViaCU is notifying affected people that their personal information, including at least names, addresses, dates of birth, Social Security numbers, Visa credit card numbers, and financial account numbers may have been stolen.
If you have received a recent notice of the data breach and have experienced recent concerning activity, it is possible that your personal information was compromised and is being offered for sale on the dark web.
If you wish to discuss this data breach incident, or if you have any questions regarding your rights and interests in this matter, please immediately contact Wolf Haldenstein by telephone at (800) 575-0735, via e-mail at [email protected], or visit our website.
Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP has experience in the prosecution of consumer rights litigation in state and federal trial and appellate courts across the country. The firm has attorneys in various practice areas and offices in New York, Chicago, Nashville, and San Diego. Courts have repeatedly recognized the reputation and expertise of this firm and have appointed it to major positions in complex consolidated litigation.
Contact:
Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP
Gregory Stone, Director of Case and Financial Analysis
Carl Malmstrom, Esq., Of Counsel
Email: [email protected] or [email protected]
Tel: (800) 575-0735 or (212) 545-4774
This press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules.
Wolf Haldenstein is investigating claims on behalf of customers who have been impacted by the Via Credit Union data breach. Via Credit Union, headquartered in Marion Indiana, announced that the personal information of customers may be have stolen as part of a recent data breach involving their systems. ViaCU is notifying affected people that their personal information, including at least names, addresses, dates of birth, Social Security numbers, Visa credit card numbers, and financial account numbers may have been stolen. If you have received a recent notice of the data breach and have experienced recent concerning activity, it is possible that your personal information was compromised and is being offered for sale on the dark web.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Supreme Court gives DOGE access to millions of Americans' private Social Security data
The Brief The Supreme Court ruled DOGE can access personal data from the Social Security Administration. The case marks the first Supreme Court decision involving DOGE, once led by Elon Musk. The dissent warned the decision puts Americans' sensitive information at risk. WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court on Friday gave the green light for the Trump administration's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to access one of the country's most sensitive databases — the Social Security Administration's internal systems — which hold information on nearly every American. The 6–3 decision, split along ideological lines, marks the first major Supreme Court ruling involving DOGE, the controversial agency once led by Elon Musk. The Court's majority reversed a lower court's order that limited DOGE's access under federal privacy law, siding with the administration's argument that the restrictions were hampering its anti-fraud mission. Liberal justices dissented, warning the decision erodes vital privacy protections. The backstory The Department of Government Efficiency — or DOGE — was established during President Trump's second term and tasked with rooting out government waste and inefficiency. Its first director was Elon Musk, who called the Social Security program a "Ponzi scheme" and repeatedly targeted it as a key source of fraud. Although Musk has since stepped away from DOGE, the department has continued aggressive efforts to audit and investigate various federal programs. Social Security has remained a top priority. The administration argued that unfettered access to the SSA's internal systems was essential to detect abuse, duplication, and improper payouts — particularly in disability and survivor benefits. Dig deeper The case originated in Maryland, where U.S. District Judge Ellen Hollander ruled that DOGE's demand for open access to Social Security data amounted to a "fishing expedition" based on limited evidence of wrongdoing. She blocked broad access but allowed DOGE staff with training and security clearance to view anonymized data, and permitted expanded access only if a specific need was documented. The Trump administration appealed, arguing the court was overstepping its role and interfering with executive branch operations. An appeals court upheld the partial block, but the Supreme Court has now lifted it entirely. Solicitor General John Sauer told the Court the restrictions "micromanaged" DOGE's work and undermined its mission. The other side Opponents of the ruling, including the plaintiffs represented by the advocacy group Democracy Forward, argue that the Social Security Administration contains deeply personal data: salary history, school records, family relationships, medical conditions, and more. They warned that handing this information to a politically driven agency without individualized review poses massive privacy risks. Labor unions and retiree groups joined the lawsuit, saying the system could be weaponized against vulnerable Americans. The dissenting justices agreed. "There is no meaningful check here on the breadth or use of the data," one wrote. "We risk turning privacy law into an empty promise." Why you should care This decision expands the Trump administration's ability to conduct sweeping audits across government agencies using personal data. While supporters frame it as a win for accountability and fraud reduction, critics say it weakens safeguards that prevent misuse of federal databases. It also sets a precedent for how much control the courts can — or cannot — exert over federal agency operations, a core issue as Trump's administration continues to consolidate executive power. What's next With the Supreme Court's backing, DOGE is expected to move quickly in analyzing Social Security data. Critics worry this could lead to mass denials of benefits or politically motivated reviews. Supporters say it could lead to cost-saving reforms. The agency, which has faced more than two dozen lawsuits, remains under scrutiny. Legal challenges are ongoing regarding its personnel decisions, data practices, and oversight authority. The Source This report is based on coverage from the Associated Press and court documents related to the Supreme Court decision in the DOGE v. Democracy Forward case. Additional background was gathered from statements by the U.S. Solicitor General, District Court Judge Ellen Hollander's original ruling, and legal filings from the plaintiff groups, including labor unions and the nonprofit Democracy Forward.
Boston Globe
2 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Supreme Court allows DOGE team to access Social Security systems with data on millions of Americans
The DOGE victories come amid a messy breakup between the president and the world's richest man that started shortly after Musk's departure from the White House and has included threats to cut government contracts and a call for the president to be impeached. The future of DOGE's work isn't clear without Musk at the helm, but both men have previously said that it will continue its efforts. Advertisement In one case, the high court halted an order from a judge in Maryland that has restricted the team's access to the Social Security Administration under federal privacy laws. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up 'We conclude that, under the present circumstances, SSA may proceed to afford members of the SSA DOGE Team access to the agency records in question in order for those members to do their work,' the court said in an unsigned order. Conservative lower-court judges have said there's no evidence at this point of DOGE mishandling personal information. The agency holds sensitive data on nearly everyone in the country, including school records, salary details and medical information. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said the court's action creates 'grave privacy risks' for millions of Americans by giving 'unfettered data access to DOGE regardless — despite its failure to show any need or any interest in complying with existing privacy safeguards, and all before we know for sure whether federal law countenances such access.' Justice Sonia Sotomayor joined Jackson's opinion and Justice Elena Kagan said she also would have ruled against the administration. Advertisement The Trump administration But 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 D. 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. Advertisement 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 plaintiffs called the high court's order 'a sad day for our democracy and a scary day for millions of people. Elon Musk may have left Washington, D.C., but his impact continues to harm millions of people.' Liz Huston, a spokesperson for the White House, applauded the order. 'The Supreme Court allowing the Trump Administration to carry out commonsense efforts to eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse and modernize government information systems is a huge victory for the rule of law.' The nation's court system has been ground zero for pushback to President Donald Trump's sweeping conservative agenda, with hundreds of lawsuits filed challenging policies on everything from immigration to education to mass layoffs of federal workers. In the other DOGE order handed down Friday, the justices extended a pause on orders that would require the team to publicly disclose information about its operations, as part of a lawsuit filed by a government watchdog group. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington argues that DOGE, which has been central to Trump's push to remake the government, is a federal agency and must be subject to the Freedom of Information Act. But the Trump administration says DOGE is just a presidential advisory body aimed at government cost-cutting, which would make it exempt from requests for documents under FOIA. The justices did not decide that issue Friday, but the conservative majority held that U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper ruled too broadly in ordering documents be turned over to CREW. Advertisement Associated Press writers Mark Sherman and Chris Megerian contributed to this report.
Miami Herald
2 hours ago
- Miami Herald
Scott Galloway sends strong message to Elon Musk about Bill Gates
Podcaster and New York University professor Scott Galloway is well-known for his provocative opinions and smart takes on business, finance and government. That fact includes Galloway's unconventional view on how Social Security ought to be run. It also involves some sharply critical words he recently spoke about Tesla CEO Elon Musk. Don't miss the move: Subscribe to TheStreet's free daily newsletter Galloway, who earns $16 million annually, contends that wealthy individuals, including himself, should not receive Social Security benefits. He advocates for means-testing to determine eligibility, ensuring that the program primarily supports those who depend on it for financial security in retirement. He highlights an imbalance in the system, pointing out that an employee at the company he owns, ProfG Media, earning $160,000 annually contributes $9,000 to Social Security, which amounts to 6% of their income. However, because Social Security taxes are capped at $160,000, someone earning millions - such as himself - still pays only $9,000, despite making exponentially more. Related: Scott Galloway warns Americans on 401(k), US economy threat Galloway sees Social Security as a safety net meant to prevent seniors from falling into poverty, rather than a mechanism for transferring wealth from younger generations to retirees who, collectively, are the most financially well-off generation in history. He argues that substantial reforms are necessary to reduce costs significantly. He believes that political leaders have avoided addressing the issue due to the risks involved, noting that older voters have managed to secure increasing financial benefits for themselves. Galloway asserts that this trend must end and that, by his math, approximately one-third of seniors should not be receiving Social Security. Appearing on a YouTube broadcast of Piers Morgan Uncensored, Galloway explained his view that a number of Musk's actions, such as spearheading the shutting down of USAID, were not to be respected. "Somehow we've decided in America that innovation and money replaces - or obviates, or excuses - depravity." Galloway said. "Or cutting off aid to HIV positive mothers, deciding what veterans should get benefits, cutting off SNAP payments, which have shown to have a positive net return when people run out of money for food at the end of the month." "I mean, I think one of the wonderful things about being an American and quite frankly, for me what it means to be a man and what I try to teach my boys, is the whole point of prosperity is such that you can protect people," he added. More on retirement: Dave Ramsey sounds alarm for Americans on Social SecurityScott Galloway warns Americans on 401(k), US economy threatShark Tank's Kevin O'Leary has message on Social Security, 401(k)s Galloway criticized Musk's behavior, arguing that wealth and success should not excuse problematic actions. According to Galloway, when someone publicly makes offensive gestures such as apparent Nazi salutes, is largely absent from their children's lives, or reportedly struggles with substance abuse, it raises serious concerns. He questions whether such a person should be considered an aspirational figure for young men. Galloway urges people to reflect on how money and status can distort public perception, noting that Musk's achievements - whether in aerospace or autonomous vehicles - are remarkable. However, he challenges the idea that these accomplishments justify moral failings, asking whether society should overlook unethical behavior simply because someone is a visionary or the richest person in the world. Related: Dave Ramsey warns Americans on Social Security Galloway discusses Musk's behavior and mentions billionaire Bill Gates as an example of an immensely wealthy person who is putting his money toward philanthropy and making the world a better place. "Does that mean unlike Bill Gates, he's not using his billions to help people?" Galloway asked. "He's not planting trees the shade of which he won't sit under. I think this is an individual who has literally come off the tracks ... and is using his immense power to get people elected." "Too many of us excuse what is abhorrent behavior," Galloway added. "I think his legacy is not going to be an EV or putting rockets into space. I think it's going to be unnecessary death, disease, and disability of the world's most vulnerable. That is not what it means to be an innovator. It's not what it means to be an American. It's not what it means to be a man." Related: Shark Tank's Kevin O'Leary sends strong message on Social Security The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.
