A coalition of major labor unions has filed a lawsuit against the US Department of the Treasury, alleging that it unlawfully granted access to sensitive financial data to Elon Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). 

The lawsuit, filed on February 3 in a Washington, DC, federal court, accuses Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent of violating federal privacy laws by allowing Musk’s team full access to the department’s payment systems.

The plaintiffs, including the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), the Alliance for Retired Americans, and the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), argue that this disclosure endangers the privacy of millions of Americans who engage in financial transactions with the federal government. 

The Treasury’s payment system includes personal and financial data such as Social Security numbers, home addresses, birth dates, and bank account details.

“The scale of the intrusion into individuals’ privacy is massive and unprecedented,” the AFL-CIO said in a statement. “People who must share information with the federal government should not be forced to share it with Elon Musk or his ‘DOGE’ team.”‍

Political Fallout and Legislative Response

The lawsuit also adds pressure on the Biden administration and Congress to intervene. On February 3, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Senator Elizabeth Warren held a press conference, calling Musk’s access to federal financial data a major concern.

Schumer announced plans to introduce legislation to prevent unauthorized access to the Treasury’s systems. “DOGE is not a real government agency,” he said. “It has no authority to make spending decisions or bypass federal law.”

Senator Warren further warned that Musk now has unchecked access to financial data that could be exploited for personal or political gain. “The system is now at the mercy of Elon Musk,” Warren said.

If successful, the legal challenge could force the Treasury to roll back its disclosures and restore stricter safeguards over personal financial data. The case is being closely watched as a key test of federal privacy protections in the face of political intervention.