Supreme Court Sides with DOGE in Social Security Fight
Elon Musk may no longer be in the Donald Trump White House, but his Department of Government Efficiency is still very much in business.
Far away from the very public feud between Musk and Trump, the entity aimed at winnowing out fraud and abuse in government spending appears to be chugging away.
And on Friday, DOGE scored two big wins in the Supreme Court.
In two separate emergency rulings, the court gave DOGE access to Social Security Administration data that had been blocked by a federal judge in Maryland, according to The Hill.
The issue involved “personally identifiable information, including Social Security numbers, medical and mental health records, bank data, and earnings history,” The Hill reported.
The court majority didn’t explain its reasoning, according to The Hill, but liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson claimed in dissent that the court appeared to be showing favoritism to the Trump White House.
“The Court is thereby, unfortunately, suggesting that what would be an extraordinary request for everyone else is nothing more than an ordinary day on the docket for this Administration,” Jackson wrote.
Liberal Justices Sonya Sotomayor and Elena Kagan also dissented. Sotomayor joined Jackson’s opinion. Kagan did not.
To Trump supporters, the ruling was a victory for ferreting out fraudulent spending.
“Now we’re REALLY going to find some MASSIVE evidence of waste fraud and abuse,” conservative commentator Nick Sortor wrote in a post on X.
#BREAKING: The Supreme Court has just granted DOGE FULL ACCESS to the Social Security database
Now we’re REALLY going to find some MASSIVE evidence of waste fraud and abuse.
Social Security payouts total about $1.6 TRILLION per year.
THE FLOOD GATES ARE OPEN! pic.twitter.com/1hRTYWItxB
— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) June 6, 2025
In the second case, according to The Hill, the high court supported DOGE in a Freedom of Information Act fight that aimed to make DOGE records available to the public.
The court majority, according to USA Today, wrote that “separation of powers concerns counsel judicial deference and restraint” when it comes to judges ordering the executive branch to turn over internal records.
Again, Sotomayor, Kagan, and Brown Jackson dissented, according to USA Today.
That suit was brought by the anti-Trump group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, which vowed to continue its fight.
“We look forward to continuing to litigate this case to ensure that the American people have open access to records showing how their government is being run,” the group said in a statement, USA Today reported.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.
Advertise with The Western Journal and reach millions of highly engaged readers, while supporting our work. Advertise Today.
