The Trump administration has admitted that officials within its Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) may have improperly accessed and shared Americans’ Social Security numbers with a political advocacy group. Court documents reveal that two DOGE team members were contacted in March 2025 by an unnamed group seeking to analyze state voter rolls, with the explicit goal of “overturning election results in certain States.”
Data Access and Potential Violations
The advocacy group requested assistance from DOGE officials at the Social Security Administration (SSA) in matching SSA data against voter rolls they had obtained. According to a Justice Department official, Elizabeth Shapiro, one of the DOGE members subsequently signed a “Voter Data Agreement” with the group. This agreement potentially violated a prior court ruling that restricted access to certain private information.
Emails suggest the DOGE team members were asked to access SSA data to match against the voter rolls, though it remains unclear if any data was actually shared. Shapiro’s court filing confirms that other SSA employees were unaware of the communications and agreement.
Political Interference and Hatch Act Implications
The SSA has referred the two DOGE employees for possible violations of the Hatch Act, which prohibits federal workers from using their positions for political activities. The timing of these contacts, coinciding with efforts to contest election outcomes, raises concerns about potential government interference in democratic processes.
Why This Matters
This incident highlights a broader trend of politically motivated data misuse. The unauthorized sharing of Social Security numbers could expose individuals to identity theft and further erode trust in government institutions. The case also underscores the need for stricter oversight of government teams with access to sensitive data, especially during politically charged periods.
The Trump administration’s acknowledgment of this potential breach marks a significant development in ongoing scrutiny of its data handling practices. The full extent of the misuse, if any, remains under investigation.
