A major federal appeals court just handed President Trump’s administration a win in a high-profile fight over his new Department of Government Efficiency, known as DOGE.
The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals threw out a lower court’s order that had blocked DOGE teams from having broad access to computer systems at the Departments of Education, Treasury, and the Office of Personnel Management (OPM).
The case was sent back to the lower court, but for now, DOGE’s work can move forward.
If you’re not familiar, DOGE was created by Trump’s January 2025 executive order to modernize government technology, cut waste, and make agencies run smoother. Every federal department now has a small “DOGE team” working with the main DOGE agency to find and fix problems in IT systems.
Critics, including several large unions, claimed that giving DOGE staff access to sensitive databases could violate the Privacy Act. They sued to shut it down.
The court said the plaintiffs had too many legal hurdles to clear all at once.
The judges called it a “multiplicative problem” — meaning the plaintiffs had to win on every single issue to succeed, while the government only had to win on one to stop them.
Here were the biggest weaknesses in the unions’ case:
- Standing: The court said the plaintiffs might not even have the right to sue because they couldn’t show a concrete injury. They argued their personal information was “at risk,” but they couldn’t point to a single instance where their data was actually accessed or misused.
- Final Agency Action: For their Administrative Procedure Act (APA) claim, they needed to show DOGE’s access was a “final agency action” — something official and binding. The court said simply granting employees IT access is not the same thing as adopting a formal policy.
- Other Legal Remedies: Even if the Privacy Act was violated, it already has its own process for handling those claims. The APA can’t be used when there’s another “adequate remedy” in place.
- Privacy Act Exceptions: The law allows sharing records within an agency if the person has a legitimate “need to know” to do their job. Since DOGE staff were brought in to improve IT systems, the court said it was reasonable they might need broad access to figure out what’s broken.
Because of all this, the appeals court decided the lower court was wrong to issue a preliminary injunction.
While this case isn’t directly about Nevada agencies, it sets a precedent that could affect federal operations here.
Many federal offices in Nevada – from VA hospitals in Reno and Las Vegas to IRS and Social Security branches – could have DOGE teams reviewing their systems.
For Nevadans frustrated with slow government service, outdated websites, or clunky online forms, DOGE’s mission could mean faster fixes.
For example, veterans waiting on benefits might see fewer delays if VA systems run smoother.
Opponents, including the American Federation of Teachers and other unions, argue that DOGE’s broad access to personal records is a privacy risk.
They worry about potential data leaks or abuse of sensitive information like Social Security numbers, tax records, and medical files.
The dissenting judge in the case warned that the access was “unprecedented” and “unnecessary.”
Supporters counter that the real danger is keeping outdated systems in place and blocking the people hired to improve them.
This ruling doesn’t end the lawsuit, but it’s a strong sign that the courts won’t make it easy to block Trump’s efficiency push.
The decision frees DOGE to continue its work across the federal government, including in Nevada offices, while the case plays out.
For now, it’s a win for the administration – and possibly a win for anyone tired of waiting in line at a federal office because “the system is down.”
The opinions expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Nevada News & Views. This article was written with the assistance of AI. Please verify information and consult additional sources as needed.
