California students initiated legal action on Friday to curb access by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to their sensitive federal student loan data, igniting disputes over invasive practices within public education.
The University of California Student Association (UCSA), representing over 230,000 enrolled students across nine campuses, is at the forefront of the lawsuit. They argue for the need to halt DOGE from accessing highly private information tied to more than 40 million federal student loan borrowers.
“The scale of the intrusion of individuals' privacy is enormous and unprecedented,” wrote plaintiffs as part of the legal documentation, highlighting fears tied to data endpoints like Social Security numbers, financial details, and information about family members.
The concern escalated after reports surfaced indicating DOGE members had gained access to sensitive internal systems within the U.S. Department of Education, leading to legal action filed against DOGE and Acting Secretary of Education Denise Carter.
One troubling allegation stems from fears among students with mixed-status families, primarily affecting those with undocumented members. “The risk has already had a concrete chilling effect, discouraging students and their families from applying for aid—or attending college at all,” explained the UCSA's filing.
During hearings, the plaintiffs pointed to various public comments made by Elon Musk, who is leading DOGE and has previously made statements questioning government officials' trustworthiness. “What ... do you think Elon Musk is going to do with your social security number??? Tweet it????” the plaintiffs' attorney remarked, likening Musk's comments to direct carelessness surrounding sensitive data.
The lawsuit accuses the education agency of breaching federal privacy laws, such as the Privacy Act of 1974, which restricts government entities from disclosing personal data without consent under ordinary circumstances. “None of the targeted exceptions in these laws allow individuals associated with DOGE, or anyone else, to obtain or access students’ personal information, except for specific purposes—purposes not implicated here,” the UCSA contended.
Legal observers note this action is one of many against DOGE, which has been under scrutiny for its growing access to federal data across multiple agencies. A federal judge recently intervened, preventing DOGE from accessing certain sensitive data from the Treasury Department, setting important precedents for these continuing disputes.
The risks of misusing sensitive information have been aggravated by reports and testimonies from individuals who fear adverse actions, especially against families of undocumented students. The Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA), which demands Social Security numbers from applicants, introduces additional layers of risk, according to student advocates.
The UCSA's concerns resonate beyond the courtroom; they have sparked discussions among lawmakers. Recently, Senator Elizabeth Warren and Minority Leader Chuck Schumer sent inquiries to Secretary Carter, seeking clarification on whether Musk’s team accessed sensitive National Student Loan data and what safeguards were established to prevent abuse.
“There are over 40 million federal student loan borrowers in the United States. It is not at all clear if DOGE officials meet the strict criteria necessary to access this sensitive information protected by federal law,” the elected officials stated, reflecting broader concerns about the operational transparency of DOGE.
This lawsuit raises urgent questions about ethical governance and the protection of private data, especially for vulnerable demographic groups. Organizations and advocacy coalitions increasingly warn about the potential fallout if students feel compelled to evacuate aid applications to protect individual and familial information.
By challenging DOGE’s operations, UCSA aims not only to safeguard students’ sensitive information but also to anchor broader accountability measures addressing similar institutional behavior across governmental operations.
Time will tell how this legal challenge evolves and whether it alters the perception of privacy standards within federal systems. The ramifications echo beyond California as privacy advocates nationwide keep watch over the movement of sensitive information between state, federal, and private hands.