A coalition of 14 state attorneys general announced plans on Thursday to file a lawsuit regarding the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), an initiative led by Elon Musk, over concerns about its access to sensitive federal payment systems. The attorneys general argue that DOGE’s access to these systems, which contain financial and personal data of millions of Americans, may not align with existing privacy regulations.
The coalition, which includes representatives from states such as California and New York, released a statement emphasizing their concerns over executive authority and data security. They noted that while former President Donald Trump issued an executive order facilitating DOGE’s work, the extent of its legal authority to access certain federal databases remains under scrutiny.
Key Concerns Over Data Access
Reports indicate that DOGE has accessed or attempted to access databases within several federal agencies, including the Departments of Treasury, Education, and Labor, along with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. The primary issue raised by the attorneys general centers around DOGE’s activities within the Treasury Department, where access to payment systems reportedly includes sensitive financial information such as banking details and Social Security numbers.
The attorneys general’s statement acknowledged that the legality of DOGE’s access depends on the scope of the executive order and existing federal and state privacy laws. “While executive authority can grant certain levels of access, it must be balanced with legal oversight and privacy protections,” the statement said.
Legal and Political Considerations
While no comprehensive federal privacy law specifically governs this situation, several states have laws that could impact DOGE’s data access. Legal experts continue to debate whether DOGE’s activities constitute a legitimate use of executive power or exceed legal boundaries. The attorneys general have not yet specified the exact legal arguments they plan to pursue but emphasized their intent to ensure compliance with applicable privacy protections.
The coalition includes attorneys general from Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Nevada, Rhode Island, and Vermont. Trump, who won Arizona and Nevada in the 2024 election, has not commented on the matter publicly. Sources familiar with the administration have suggested that DOGE is viewed as an essential part of broader efforts to restructure federal spending and government operations.
Treasury’s Temporary Measures
In response to these concerns, the Treasury Department has temporarily limited additional DOGE access to its payment systems. This decision followed a lawsuit filed by a coalition of labor unions citing privacy concerns. The lawsuit outlines the sensitive nature of the data housed in these federal systems, which includes:
- Banking information (account and routing numbers)
- Social Security numbers
- Credit card details
- Birthdates and locations
- Contact information (mailing addresses, phone numbers, emails)
- Household financial information (income, assets, and liabilities)
- Employer details
- Driver’s license numbers
- Usernames and passwords
The upcoming legal challenge is expected to further clarify the extent of DOGE’s authority and data access rights under federal law. As discussions continue, stakeholders from both legal and policy sectors will likely examine whether executive actions alone provide sufficient justification for DOGE’s involvement in government financial systems.
This case underscores ongoing debates over executive power, privacy, and government accountability, highlighting the complexities of balancing efficiency with legal oversight.
Help us bring real change! Corporate lobbying has corrupted our system for too long, and it’s time to take action. Please sign and share this petition—your support is crucial in restoring accountability to our government. Every signature counts! Thank you!
https://www.ipetitions.com/petition/restore-our-republic-end-lobbying
Support truth, health, and preparedness by shopping the Alex Jones Store through our link. Every purchase helps sustain independent voices and earns us a 10% share to fuel our mission. Shop now and make a difference!
https://thealexjonesstore.com?sca_ref=7730615.EU54Mw6oyLATer7a
Sponsored • TRJ Ads
Inquiries: contact@therealistjuggernaut.com
https://youtu.be/ZHXVeLVHWuY?si=nk3o9Pij-ziXalmA
And yet they did NOTHING while insiders were running our country for the last four years, according to Lindy Li who just bared her soul to Shawn Ryan.
I continue to waffle on this story because of all the ridiculous sums of money DOGE is uncovering that USAID gave to celebrities, donors, etc. tied to Biden-Harris. Despicable.
Thank you, Sheila! That’s exactly the issue—selective outrage and manufactured distractions while the real power players operate unchecked. The sums of money DOGE is uncovering should have everyone asking the obvious: Where was this accountability when billions were funneled into the pockets of political insiders, donors, and celebrities? USAID’s connections to the Biden-Harris network are just the tip of the iceberg. The people pretending to be outraged now were silent for four years while corruption ran rampant. The real story isn’t just the money—it’s the deliberate cover-ups and who gets protected. That’s what’s truly despicable.
Yes, I was also thinking that they don’t want to sue and get involved because they sense what’s coming for Musk and want to see him crash and burn. No more competition then.
I see where you’re coming from, Edward, but I don’t think they actually want to see Elon crash—not in the way people might assume. If anything, they’re watching and waiting, knowing that if he stumbles, they’ll be right there to either absorb his market share or quietly take over the infrastructure he’s built. The reality is, these corporations don’t operate on rivalry the way the public perceives it—they operate on strategic alignment when it benefits them. If Elon’s ventures help normalize a new level of control or data access, they won’t oppose it; they’ll adopt it when the time is right, just like Apple did. If anything, they’ll let him take the risks, and when the dust settles, they’ll either integrate or replace him. That’s how these power plays work.
Great points, and you are probably right. It’s going to be interesting to watch how these CEOs develop their strategies and navigate our current environment.
Exactly, Edward. These CEOs aren’t just reacting—they’re planning several moves ahead, ensuring they’re positioned no matter which way things go. It’s not about competition; it’s about control and influence. By the time the public catches on, the deals will already be made, and the power shifts will be locked in. Watching how they navigate this will definitely be interesting, but more importantly, it’ll reveal who’s truly calling the shots behind the scenes.
Absolutely!
I’m more concerned about the system and network access that he and his team have. It’s problematic at all levels, and I’m surprised that Amazon, Microsoft, and others are not suing the government over this incredible advantage he now has over his competitors. His team reviewing “ code” sounds fishy to me.
You’re absolutely right, Edward. The fact that Microsoft, Amazon, and the rest aren’t pushing back tells us everything we need to know—they’re likely complicit or at least have a vested interest in not rocking the boat. If this were truly an issue of unfair competition, you’d expect a legal battle by now, but their silence suggests alignment rather than opposition. As for “reviewing code,” that’s a red flag all on its own. What kind of backdoors, vulnerabilities, or insider advantages are being handed over under the guise of efficiency? This isn’t just about access—it’s about control. And the deeper we look, the clearer it becomes that this entire operation is about consolidation of power, not transparency or fairness.
It’s read-only though, right? I read code for years and couldn’t change a thing!
That’s what’s been reported—that they only have read-only access, but even that is dangerous especially when we don’t know the technical background of these techs.
Edward, It definitely is dangerous for sure. Global technocracy is what these people are trying to accomplish.
Sheila, that’s the assumption most people have, but with today’s tech, ‘read-only’ doesn’t mean untouchable. There are methods like side-channel attacks, covert exfiltration techniques, and live memory injection that allow for reading and uploading without detection. In advanced cases, fileless malware or remote code execution can bypass traditional security, making it possible to not just read data but modify or extract it in real-time. The idea that ‘if you can’t change it, no one else can’ is outdated—modern exploits don’t leave traces in the way traditional file modifications would. Since you’ve read code for years, you know that access is everything—and with the right tools, access can be silent, invisible, and unrestricted. That’s the reality of today’s tech landscape.
Well, I suppose you’re right, John. I also used to provide user access on Unix systems. We had access permissions for different applications too. It was complex then, but as you say, outdated now. That’s why cybersecurity is Graduate school level now (a niece of ours is studying that in college).
I guess all I can say now is that I am ‘familiar with the tech’ since I am now an old woman. Ha! Know enough to be mildly dangerous.
Sheila, you’ve got more tech knowledge than most, and that definitely counts for something! Unix access control was complex back then, but today’s cybersecurity landscape is a whole different battlefield. Attack surfaces have expanded, exploits are more advanced, and what used to be ‘secure’ is now just a speed bump for modern threat actors.
Your niece is diving into a field that’s constantly evolving—cybersecurity isn’t just a profession now, it’s digital warfare. And as for you being ‘mildly dangerous’—hey, sometimes that’s exactly the right amount of dangerous to keep people on their toes. 😎
🥹🫣