Overview
On Saturday, Judge Engelmayer granted an application for temporary restraining order filed that day by the Attorneys General of 19 States. They requested that, pending a hearing for preliminary injunction, the Court restrain access by the Department of Government Efficiency (“DOGE”) — or others that normally lack access — to the Treasury Department’s “payment record, payment systems, or any other data systems maintained by the Treasury Department containing personally identifiable information and/or confidential financial information of payees.”
Among the arguments advanced by the Attorneys General is that the Privacy Act of 1974 limits the disclosure of confidential information within an agency to specified persons within that agency, without any authority for disclosure to DOGE staffers or others outside Treasury.
The Court, in granting the temporary restraining order and scheduling a hearing for a preliminary injunction for February 14, agreed with the States that, absent a TRO, there was risk of sensitive information being compromised or the system being vulnerable to hacking:
The Court’s firm assessment is that, for the reasons stated by the States, they will face irreparable harm in the absence of injunctive relief. See Winter v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 20 (2008). That is both because of the risk that the new policy presents of the disclosure of sensitive and confidential information and the heightened risk that the systems in question will be more vulnerable than before to hacking. The Court’s further assessment is that, again for the reasons given by the States, the States have shown a likelihood of success on the merits of their claims, with the States’ statutory claims presenting as particularly strong. The Court’s further assessment is that the balance of the equities, for the reasons stated by the States, favors the entry of emergency relief.
