DOGE Goons Violate the Hatch Act, May Have Tried to Use Social Security Data to ‘Overturn Election Results’
Two employees from Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) have been formally referred to the Justice Department for alleged violations of the Hatch Act and possible misuse of sensitive Social Security Administration (SSA) data in coordination with an advocacy group aiming to “overturn election results in certain states,” according to court documents obtained by Politico and disclosed Friday.
The referrals mark a significant escalation in legal and ethical scrutiny surrounding DOGE, the controversial efficiency initiative co-led by Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy.
The department was granted sweeping access to data across multiple federal agencies—including the SSA, Department of Education, Office of Personnel Management, and Treasury as part of its mandate to identify waste, fraud, and inefficiencies in government operations.
The Social Security Administration referred the two DOGE employees after discovering communications with an unnamed advocacy group focused on challenging election results. One employee allegedly signed a “Voter Data Agreement” that could have involved using SSA records to match against state voter rolls.
DOJ official Elizabeth Shapiro confirmed the referrals in court filings, stating the employees were flagged for Hatch Act violations, which prohibit federal employees from engaging in partisan political activities while on duty or using government resources.
Shapiro wrote: “At this time, there is no evidence that SSA employees outside of the involved members of the DOGE Team were aware of the communications with the advocacy group. Nor were they aware of the ‘Voter Data Agreement.’”
However, she added a critical detail: “Emails suggest that DOGE Team members could have been asked to assist the advocacy group by accessing SSA data to match to the voter rolls.”
It remains unclear whether any actual data was shared, but the potential alone has triggered alarm among privacy advocates, election integrity experts, and Democratic lawmakers.
The filings also revealed additional concerning practices by DOGE team members: Sharing government information on unauthorized third-party servers and accessing data that was prohibited by existing court orders at the time.
These actions raise questions about data security, compliance with federal privacy laws (including the Privacy Act of 1974), and adherence to judicial restrictions on DOGE’s scope of access.
The SSA referrals stem from ongoing litigation challenging DOGE’s broad data-gathering authority. The “corrections” to prior SSA testimony were submitted as part of that case.
Did You Know?:Gamblers Accuse Karoline Leavitt of ‘Insider Trading’ After Abrupt Stage Exit
DOGE was established shortly after Trump’s inauguration with a mandate to slash federal spending, eliminate regulations, and restructure agencies. Musk and Ramaswamy have promised dramatic cuts—up to $2 trillion in some estimates while gaining unprecedented access to sensitive government databases.
Critics have warned from the beginning that such access, combined with minimal oversight and the involvement of private-sector figures like Musk, creates enormous risks of misuse, politicization, or data breaches.
The Hatch Act, enacted in 1939, is designed to prevent federal employees from using their official positions to engage in partisan political activity. Violations can result in fines, removal from office, or criminal prosecution in severe cases.
Looking at the Legal Ramifications
The referrals come at a politically charged moment: DOGE’s actions are already under multiple lawsuits alleging overreach, privacy violations, and unconstitutional authority. Congressional Democrats have demanded hearings and subpoenas related to DOGE’s data practices. More so, Republicans have defended DOGE as a necessary tool to combat government waste and inefficiency.
If substantiated, the allegations could lead to: Criminal investigations by the DOJ, congressional contempt proceedings, civil lawsuits from affected individuals or privacy groups and further restrictions on DOGE’s data access by courts
The involvement of an advocacy group seeking to “overturn election results” echoes discredited 2020 fraud claims and raises questions about whether DOGE resources were being used for partisan ends.
DOGE has not publicly commented on the referrals. Musk has previously dismissed criticism of the initiative as partisan attacks or bureaucratic resistance.
The White House has characterized DOGE as a transformative force for efficiency, with Trump praising Musk and Ramaswamy for “cutting through red tape.”
Privacy and civil rights organizations have called the referrals “deeply disturbing” and demanded immediate suspension of DOGE’s data access pending full investigation.
TOP STORIES
- Trump Faces Voter Exodus as New Supporters Abandon Ship One Year Into Second Term
- Trump Didn’t Do Anything Wrong? Well, a Deleted DOJ File Just Surfaced, Dragging Him Straight Into the Epstein Scandal
- Jack Smith, Who Claimed He Found Dirt on Trump, Is Now Set to Give Live Testimony in Major Reversal
The case has become a flashpoint in the broader debate over the intersection of private-sector influence, government data, and political power as the Justice Department reviews the matter.
Whether the allegations prove isolated or indicative of systemic misuse, they have already cast a long shadow over DOGE’s operations—and raised urgent questions about the safeguards protecting Americans’ most sensitive personal information from political exploitation.
Discover more from STITCH SNITCHES
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.