SSA Whistleblower Says DOGE Data Misuse Was Ignored for Months After DOJ Confirms Improper Social Security Sharing

📌 Key Facts

• A Justice Department Jan. 16, 2026 court filing discloses that DOGE employees detailed to the Social Security Administration last March shared sensitive Social Security data via a nonsecure third‑party server, circumvented SSA IT rules (including sending a password‑protected file to DOGE affiliates), and retained visibility into data even after a March 20, 2025 temporary restraining order.
• SSA told DOJ in December that earlier sworn statements by senior SSA officials — claiming DOGE access had been revoked — were false; DOJ says those officials did not know their statements were false at the time, and both agencies now acknowledge they do not know the full extent of what data was accessed or shared or whether any of it reached outside parties.
• SSA currently does not know exactly what data was placed on the third‑party server or whether it remains there, corroborating whistleblower allegations that DOGE’s access to SSA data was chaotic and poorly controlled.
• SSA’s Jan. 16 filing admits two DOGE staff secretly consulted a political advocacy group seeking to match Social Security data with state voter rolls to “find evidence of voter fraud and to overturn election results in certain States”; those staff were referred to a federal watchdog for possible Hatch Act violations, and reporting indicates DOGE personnel were embedded with sweeping access under political pressure and likely pursued election‑related objectives, not just fraud detection.
• Plaintiffs in the case, including the Alliance for Retired Americans, say the disclosures amount to “brazen misconduct” and are incorporating them into litigation; whistleblower Chuck Borges says the filing validates his allegation that DOGE copied a 300‑million‑person SSA dataset into a virtual environment without required safeguards.
• Chuck Borges, SSA’s chief data officer and the original whistleblower, says he repeatedly warned agency leadership about DOGE access, was sidelined after filing his complaint, and that SSA officials initially dismissed or minimized his concerns until DOJ’s Jan. 16 filing forced acknowledgment.
• The DOJ submission was presented as “corrections to the record” in ongoing federal court litigation in Maryland, directly updating the court on the mishandling of data and prior misstatements by agency officials and DOGE personnel.

📰 Source Timeline (4)

Follow how coverage of this story developed over time