Government says OPM-2 and OPM-18 were OPM employees at all relevant times
U.S. Office of Personnel ManagementLead defendant, in a brief filed for OPM and the other defendants by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York
In a July 7 reply brief, the government argues that two people the case identifies as OPM-2 and OPM-18 were OPM employees throughout the relevant period, and that the plaintiffs cannot show ongoing injury.
“it should still conclude that OPM-2 and OPM-18 were at all relevant times OPM employees, as the totality of the evidence refutes plaintiffs’ characterization”
Original text
Where this statement fits
Judge Cote rules OPM's DOGE data access broke the Privacy Act; the government argues no relief is needed
Judge Denise Cote ruled on October 20, 2026 that the U.S. Office of Personnel Management violated the Privacy Act when it gave DOGE agents broad access to systems holding federal workers' personal records in early 2025. The government argued the access went to OPM employees and that no further relief is warranted. The court has not yet decided relief.
Source and context
Original text
About this source
The defendants' reply memorandum in support of their summary judgment motion and in opposition to the plaintiffs' cross-motion.
Before the quotation
The brief says the plaintiffs rely on a roster from a separate case listing DOGE employees, which is not part of the administrative record, and asks the court not to consider it.
After the quotation
It cites sworn declarations from DOGE Administrator Amy Gleason, from OPM-18 himself and from an OPM human resources specialist saying OPM-18 was never detailed to DOGE.
How this statement is classified
The label describes this statement's response within the context above.
Why this label?
The case concerns OPM's decision to give DOGE agents access to federal personnel records. The government argues that the two people at issue were OPM employees when they received access, which defends the conduct under scrutiny.
- Recorded on
- Published here
More from this case
Read the full caseEisen says the government had no business giving DOGE the personal data of tens of millions of people
“The federal government had no business handing the personal data of tens of millions of people to Elon Musk and DOGE”Read statement
EFF says OPM's disclosure to DOGE violated the Privacy Act
Electronic Frontier Foundation
“This disclosure violates the federal Privacy Act of 1974, a watershed anti-surveillance statute that prevents the federal government from abusing our personal information.”Read statement
Cote rules OPM's grant of DOGE access to personnel records was unlawful
“OPM’s decision to grant DOGE Agents broad access to its systems of records containing PII without a demonstrated need was unlawful”Read statement
Share or embed this statement
The embed keeps its attribution link to The Dispute Index. Credit the image to The Dispute Index and link to the statement page.
Cite this record
- Publisher
- The Dispute Index
- Title
- Government says OPM-2 and OPM-18 were OPM employees at all relevant times
- First published
- Last updated
- Permalink
- https://disputeindex.com/events/6975-in-a-july-7-reply-brief-the-government
Last updated marks the most recent saved version of this published statement.
The Dispute Index. "Government says OPM-2 and OPM-18 were OPM employees at all relevant times". First published: 2026-10-27. Last updated: 2026-10-27. https://disputeindex.com/events/6975-in-a-july-7-reply-brief-the-government