“Confirmed Judges, Confirmed Fears” is a blog series documenting the harmful impact of President Trump’s judges on Americans’ rights and liberties. It includes judges nominated in both his first and second terms.
Trump Fourth Circuit judge Julius Richardson wrote a 2-1 decision that allows Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to have access to government records containing sensitive personal data on millions of Americans, overruling a lower court decision to the contrary. Clinton nominee Judge Robert King dissented from the August 2025 ruling in AFT v Bessent.
What happened in this case?
Shortly after President Trump began his second term, he authorized his DOGE to obtain access to government databases at the Treasury Department and elsewhere that contain sensitive data on millions of Americans who have worked for the government. A number of individuals plus labor unions representing many more filed suit in federal court. Among other claims, they maintained that granting DOGE unfettered access to such records violated their privacy rights.
A district court granted a preliminary injunction against DOGE in February. The Fourth Circuit, however, stayed the injunction while it considered the government’s appeal.
How did Trump judge Richardson and the Fourth Circuit majority rule and why is the result harmful?
Trump judge Richardson wrote a 2-1 decision, joined by Geoge W Bush nominee Steven Agee, that reversed the district court decision and allowed DOGE to maintain access to and use the personal data. They cited a Supreme Court shadow docket ruling in June, made possible by three deciding votes from the Trump justices, which similarly allowed DOGE to continue to have access to Social Security information.
Judge King strongly dissented. He explained that the majority had erroneously ruled that the plaintiffs must show an “extremely high likelihood of success on each individual issue” in the case in order to “have a normal likelihood of success overall.” Based on the proper standard, he wrote, the lower court decision should be affirmed.
Analysts have already criticized the Fourth Circuit’ decision. Alexandra Reeve Gibbons, CEO of the Center for Democracy and Technology, stated that it is part of a pattern by too many courts to give “the greenlight” to the Trump Administration and DOGE to “continue playing fast and loose with all of our most sensitive information” and “overturn longstanding privacy norms.” The ruling also illustrates the importance of our federal courts to health, welfare and justice and the significance of having fair-minded judges on the federal bench.