‘Hitting a fly with a sledgehammer’: Judge blocks DOGE from accessing sensitive Social Security records
(spxChrome/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — The Department of Government Efficiency approach’s to identifying fraud at the Social Security Administration “is tantamount to hitting a fly with a sledgehammer,” a federal judge said Thursday, blocking DOGE’s unlimited access to sensitive agency data.
In a 137-page ruling, U.S. District Judge Ellen Lipton Hollander wrote the Trump administration never justified the need to access the data — which they argued was vital to identifying alleged fraud — and likely violated multiple federal laws in doing so.
“The DOGE Team is essentially engaged in a fishing expedition at SSA, in search of a fraud epidemic, based on little more than suspicion. It has launched a search for the proverbial needle in the haystack, without any concrete knowledge that the needle is actually in the haystack,” she wrote.
The judge’s order blocks the agency from granting DOGE access to systems containing personally identifiable information and orders DOGE members to destroy any data in their possession that identifies individual taxpayers. However, the judge’s decision allows DOGE to continue to allow access anonymized data from the agency.
According to Hollander, the decision to give DOGE “unlimited access to SSA’s entire record system” endangered the sensitive and private information of millions of Americans, risking information including Social Security numbers, credit card information, medical and mental health records, hospitalization records, marriage and birth certificates, and bank information.
“The government has not even attempted to explain why a more tailored, measured, titrated approach is not suitable to the task,” she wrote. “Instead, the government simply repeats its incantation of a need to modernize the system and uncover fraud. Its method of doing so is tantamount to hitting a fly with a sledgehammer.”
The lawsuit challenging DOGE’s access was filed last month by two national unions and an advocacy group who argued DOGE’s access violated privacy laws and the Administrative Procedures Act. In a statement to ABC News, the president of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees celebrated the decision as a “major win for working people and retirees across the country.”
“The court saw that Elon Musk and his unqualified lackeys present a grave danger to Social Security and have illegally accessed the data of millions of Americans,” AFSCME President Lee Saunders said in a statement.
In her decision, the judge also pointed out the irony that DOGE has accessed the sensitive information of millions of Americans while the identities of the DOGE employees working in the SSA have been concealed for privacy reasons.
“The defense does not appear to share a privacy concern for the millions of Americans whose SSA records were made available to the DOGE affiliates, without their consent,” she wrote.
Illustration by Thomas Fuller/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images
(WASHINGTON) — The White House on Thursday pulled President Donald Trump’s nomination of Dr. David Weldon to lead the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, multiple sources told ABC News.
The withdrawal came just before Weldon was to appear for his confirmation hearing Thursday morning before the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, where he was expected to be grilled on his past comments questioning vaccine safety.
The development was first reported by Axios.
Weldon, a physician who served in Congress from 1995 until 2009, had kept a relatively low profile for years until being nominated by Trump in November.
But his skepticism of established science around vaccines made him a popular pick among allies of Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the new secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services.
As recently as 2019, Weldon promoted the unsubstantiated theory that vaccines could cause autism.
In 2007, Weldon co-authored a “vaccine safety bill” with former Democratic Rep. Carolyn Maloney, which sought to give control over vaccine safety to an independent agency within HHS.
The bill, which stalled in a House subcommittee, would “provide the independence necessary to ensure that vaccine safety research is robust, unbiased, free from conflict of interest criticism, and broadly accepted by the public at large,” Weldon said in a press release announcing the bill.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
The White House on Thursday pulled President Donald Trump’s nomination of Dr. David Weldon to lead the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, multiple sources told ABC News.
The withdrawal came just before Weldon was to appear for his confirmation hearing before the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, where he was expected to be grilled on his past comments questioning vaccine safety. The room was all set for the hearing before the developments, which was first reported by Axios.
Weldon was pulled because he didn’t have the votes to be confirmed, according to two sources familiar with his nomination. This was the first time a CDC director nominee had to be be Senate-confirmed.
Weldon, a physician who served in Congress from 1995 until 2009, had kept a relatively low profile for years until being nominated by Trump in November.
But his skepticism of established science around vaccines made him a popular pick among allies of Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the new secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services.
As recently as 2019, Weldon promoted the unsubstantiated theory that vaccines could cause autism.
In 2007, Weldon co-authored a “vaccine safety bill” with former Democratic Rep. Carolyn Maloney, which sought to give control over vaccine safety to an independent agency within HHS.
The bill, which stalled in a House subcommittee, would “provide the independence necessary to ensure that vaccine safety research is robust, unbiased, free from conflict of interest criticism, and broadly accepted by the public at large,” Weldon said in a press release announcing the bill.
Weldon was being considered as a measles outbreak sweeps across the U.S.
Democrat Sen. Patty Murray, former chair of the committee Weldon was going to testify before, said that he raised concerning anti-vaccine sentiment during their private meeting.
“In our meeting last month, I was deeply disturbed to hear Dr. Weldon repeat debunked claims about vaccines — it’s dangerous to put someone in charge at CDC who believes the lie that our rigorously tested childhood vaccine schedule is somehow exposing kids to toxic levels of mercury or causing autism,” Murray said in a statement.
“As we face one of the worst measles outbreaks in years thanks to President Trump, a vaccine skeptic who spent years spreading lies about safe and proven vaccines should never have even been under consideration to lead the foremost agency charged with protecting public health,” Murray added.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
(WASHINGTON) — Pam Bondi has developed a reputation as one of President-elect Donald Trump’s most loyal defenders — a vocal political and legal advocate who represented Trump during his first impeachment, boosted his efforts to sow doubts about his 2020 election loss, and stood by him during his New York criminal trial.
After more than a decade of defending him, Bondi is now the president-elect’s nominee to be the country’s top prosecutor and reform the Department of Justice as his nominee for attorney general.
The role of the country’s top law enforcement officer gives Bondi an opportunity to fulfill Trump’s campaign promise to transform the DOJ that has investigated and prosecuted him for the last two years, with Bondi vowing to “clean house” prosecute members of the so-called “deep state.”
“When Republicans take back the White House, and we will be back in there in 18 months or less, you know what’s going to happen? The Department of Justice, the prosecutors will be prosecuted — the bad ones — the investigators will be investigated,” Bondi said on Fox News in 2023.
On Wednesday, Bondi will kick off two days of hearings to secure confirmation as the next attorney general, as lawmakers prepare to question her over her extensive legal, political and lobbying background — and whether her longtime loyalty to Trump will impact her oversight of the nation’s top law enforcement agencies.
If confirmed, Bondi would lead a Department of Justice staffed at the highest levels by Trump’s former defense attorneys and facing a potential morale and resignation crisis by the career prosecutors who carry the bulk of the department’s workload.
“For too long, the partisan Department of Justice has been weaponized against me and other Republicans – Not anymore,” Trump wrote in his announcement of Bondi for attorney general.
What is Bondi’s law enforcement background?
While Bondi lacks any federal prosecutorial experience, she was a county prosecutor in Florida before serving two terms as Florida’s attorney general between 2011 and 2019 — the state’s first female AG — where she fought in court to challenge Obamacare and uphold Florida’s constitutional ban on same-sex marriage.
In his announcement, Trump touted Bondi’s work combating the trafficking of fentanyl and reducing overdose deaths. Bondi’s office sued multiple drug manufacturers as well as pharmacy chains Walgreens and CVS for their role in the opioid crisis, alleging the companies worked together to increase the supply and demand for the drugs while downplaying the risk of addiction. Her office claimed that efforts to shut down pill mills led to a 52% decline in oxycodone deaths statewide.
Bondi’s time as Florida attorney general was not without controversy, garnering criticism for her attempt to delay the execution of a man convicted of murder because of a conflict with a campaign fundraiser. Both Bondi and Trump also attracted criticism during the 2016 race over a $25,000 contribution that the Trump Foundation made in 2013 to a political group backing Bondi’s reelection campaign.
The contribution came days after New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman announced a lawsuit against Trump University, which Bondi’s office considered joining. The office had received at least 22 complaints regarding Trump University and related entities between 2008 and 2011, according to Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, which filed a complaint that the donation was a violation of rules prohibiting nonprofit foundations from making political donations.
One month after the donation, Bondi’s office declined to join New York’s lawsuit, justifying the decision by noting that Florida consumers would still be compensated if Schneiderman won his lawsuit.
Both Trump and Bondi have denied that the donation was related to the lawsuit. The Trump Foundation eventually paid a $2,500 penalty to the IRS for improperly reporting the donation.
Trump University and the Trump Foundation were closed following multiple lawsuits, and a judge ordered Trump to pay $2 million for misusing his foundation.
What has she done in the private sector?
After leaving office in 2019, Bondi joined the lobbying firm Ballard Partners – the same firm that once employed Trump’s chief of staff Susie Wiles – where she represented major corporate clients like Amazon, General Motors, Uber and the private prison company the GEO Group, among others.
On her Senate questionnaire, Bondi also listed several foreign governments she lobbied on behalf of while at Ballard, including the Dominican Republic, Qatar, Zimbabwe and Kosovo. Senate Democrats have pushed for more information over Bondi’s foreign lobbying work to determine any potential conflicts of interest that might surface should she be confirmed as attorney general.
Beyond her work as a lobbyist, Bondi solidified her reputation as a Trump loyalist by defending him on the floor of the Senate during his first impeachment and helping his efforts to discredit the 2020 election results.
Hired by the Trump administration in November 2019 during his first impeachment, Bondi used her role to raise doubts about then-Vice President Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden’s role with the Ukrainian natural gas company Burisma, alleging it was a conflict of interest with his father’s position in the Obama administration.
Bondi served as an adviser on Trump’s 2020 campaign, helping file a string of unsuccessful lawsuits alleging voter fraud and pushing to delegitimize vote counting in Pennsylvania.
“We do have evidence of cheating,” Bondi told Fox News. “We are still on the ground in Pennsylvania. I am here right now, and we are not going anywhere until they declare that we won Pennsylvania.”
Despite her legal efforts, Trump lost the state and the 2020 election to Biden.
What will Bondi inherit at the Department of Justice?
Trump announced Bondi as his nominee for attorney general almost immediately after former Rep. Matt Gaetz announced he was withdrawing his nomination for the position amid increasing questions about sexual misconduct and other allegations that were later detailed in a report from the House Ethics Committee.
Several career officials who spoke to ABC News following the initial announcement of Gaetz’s nomination, however, said it put on full display Trump’s intentions for the Justice Department after years of battling prosecutors from Special Counsel Jack Smith’s office. Nearly every other major nominee put forward thus far by Trump for a leadership position at DOJ served as his defense attorney in at least one of the criminal cases he faced after leaving the White House.
Trump has repeatedly vowed to use the DOJ to target his political opponents while issuing sweeping pardons for the rioters who attacked the U.S. Capitol in an attempt to overturn his 2020 election loss.
The career officials who spoke to ABC News described such actions as nightmare scenarios directly compromising the traditional independence of the Justice Department, which could prompt many career officials to resign.
Attorney General Merrick Garland in recent weeks has repeatedly messaged to DOJ’s career workforce that they should remain and carry out their duties in accordance with the Constitution and longstanding department norms of political independence.
The overt threats by Trump and his allies to clean house of any officials who had significant involvement in the investigations led by Special Counsel Jack Smith, however, have already led some career officials to head to the exits — including some who have reached out to attorneys in recent weeks for potential legal representation should they ultimately be targeted by the incoming administration.
Photo by Kremlin Press Office / Handout/Anadolu Agency/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump‘s “trust” in Russia’s Vladimir Putin now faces a major test as the world waits for Moscow to respond to a 30-day ceasefire proposed by the U.S. and accepted by Ukraine.
Trump said after Tuesday’s breakthrough in Saudi Arabia that he would speak with Putin soon, though declined to comment on Wednesday when asked if anything had been scheduled.
“I’ve gotten some positive messages, but a positive message means nothing,” he said from the Oval Office, where he was peppered with question on what comes next. “This is a very serious situation.”
The Kremlin has cautiously said it is reviewing the proposal and it will not be pushed into anything.
The Trump administration placed significant pressure on Ukraine in recent weeks in stopping military aid and pausing some intelligence sharing — both resumed only after Ukraine agreed to the ceasefire on Tuesday.
U.S. officials, including Trump himself, have also set limited expectations amid broader negotiations on Ukraine’s borders and expressly ruled out NATO membership for the Eastern European ally.
Meanwhile, they’ve not publicly demanded any concessions from Putin — and it’s not clear how far Trump is willing to go in pressuring Russia to accept the 30-day ceasefire.
“We can, but I hope it’s not going to be necessary,” Trump said on Wednesday when asked about that very issue.
“There are things you could do that wouldn’t be pleasant in a financial sense,” he added without divulging any specifics. “I can do things financially that would be very bad for Russia. I don’t want to do that because I want to get peace.”
Trump last Friday threatened sanctions on Russia until it reached an agreement with Ukraine. The Biden administration imposed hundreds of sanctions on Moscow over the course of the conflict.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio earlier on Wednesday noted that Russia is already “pretty sanctioned up” as he was asked what pressure the administration would be ready to apply.
“As far as I am aware, the United States has not provided armaments to Russia,” Rubio said as he largely sidestepped the inquiry. “The United States is not providing assistance to Russia. Every single sanction that has been imposed on Russia remains in place … So my point being is that there’s been no steps taken to relieve any of these things, these things continue to be in place.”
“We don’t think it’s constructive for me to stand here today and begin to issue threats about what we’re going to do if Russia says no, let’s hope they say yes,” Rubio said.
Trump has also often praised his relationship with Putin, saying he knows him “very well” and declining to call him a dictator despite using the term to describe Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
“I think he wants peace. I think he would tell me if he didn’t,” Trump said of the Russian leader in mid-February. “I trust him on this subject. I think he’d like to see something happen.”
Just last week, in an interview with Fox News, Trump claimed Putin was “more generous” and easier to work with than Ukraine.
Now, the administration is saying the ball is in Russia’s court after Ukraine agreed to an immediate, monthlong stoppage in hostilities should Moscow do the same.
“We’ll see what their response is,” Rubio said. “If their response is yes, then we know we’ve made real progress and there’s a real chance of peace. If their response is no, it will be highly unfortunate and then it’ll make their intentions clear.”
ABC News’ Patrick Reevell and Kelsey Walsh contributed to this report.
