SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
afge
Unions Sue to Revoke Musk Cronies' Access to Critical Payment System
"It is disgraceful that the Trump administration has allowed unelected billionaires and their lackeys unfettered access to the personal and financial information of Americans."
Feb 04, 2025
A pair of labor unions and an advocacy group representing retirees sued the U.S. Treasury Department on Monday in an effort to halt Elon Musk's team's dangerous access to a critical government payment system—access granted by U.S. President Donald Trump's handpicked Treasury chief.
In a lawsuit filed with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the Alliance for Retired Americans, the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), and the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) said they're seeking to stop the Trump Treasury Department's "unlawful, ongoing, systematic, and continuous disclosure of personal and financial information" to Musk and members of his so-called Department of Government Efficiency( DOGE).
"The scale of the intrusion into individuals' privacy is massive and unprecedented," the complaint states. "Millions of people cannot avoid engaging in financial transactions with the federal government and, therefore, cannot avoid having their sensitive personal and financial information maintained in government records."
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent's decision last week to give DOGE "full, continuous, and ongoing access to that information for an unspecified period of time means that retirees, taxpayers, federal employees, companies, and other individuals from all walks of life have no assurance that their information will receive the protection that federal law affords," the lawsuit adds.
The coalition urged the court to immediately enjoin the Treasury Department from "continuing to permit such access," which has sparked calls for Bessent's impeachment as observers characterize the Musk team's infiltration of key federal agencies as a coup.
"It is disgraceful that the Trump administration has allowed unelected billionaires and their lackeys unfettered access to the personal and financial information of Americans," AFGE national president Everett Kelley said in a statement Monday. "Together, we can stop this violation of American citizens' privacy."
Richard Fiesta, executive director of the Alliance for Retired Americans, said that "we are outraged and alarmed that the Trump administration has allowed so-called DOGE staff to violate the law and access millions of older Americans' sensitive personal and financial data."
"Seniors are already the most vulnerable Americans to fraud and scams, with FBI data showing losses of $3.4 billion in 2023 alone," Fiesta added. "We urge the court to quickly act to stop this unlawful theft of our data."
"We are living a nightmare created by Donald Trump and Elon Musk, and we need to wake up."
The lawsuit was filed as Bessent reportedly assured Republican lawmakers behind closed doors that Musk and his cronies "do not have control over" the Treasury payment system overseen by the Bureau of the Fiscal Service.
But reporting out Tuesday morning suggests that's not true. According toWired, "a 25-year-old engineer named Marko Elez, who previously worked for two Elon Musk companies, has direct access to Treasury Department systems responsible for nearly all payments made by the U.S. government."
Citing unnamed sources, Wired reported that "Elez's privileges include the ability not just to read but to write code on two of the most sensitive systems in the U.S. government: The Payment Automation Manager (PAM) and Secure Payment System (SPS) at the Bureau of the Fiscal Service (BFS)."
Researcher Nathan Tankus wrote in his newsletter early Tuesday that "we are in such a catastrophic situation I do not have the words to describe."
"It is getting worse and very little is being done. Lawsuits have been launched to stop this on privacy grounds, but we need so much more. Strongly worded letters from Congress are not enough," wrote Tankus. "There is a protest at the Treasury today. This is not a newsletter to tell you how to organize or engage in political action. But wherever you are, whatever your context, get involved in resisting the Trump administration's catastrophic lawlessness and destruction. And get the word out about the Trump-Musk Treasury Payments Crisis of 2025, which is the crisis above all the crises happening concurrently."
At a press conference on Monday, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) said that "when unelected billionaires start ransacking our government offices, this is not business as usual."
"We are living a nightmare created by Donald Trump and Elon Musk, and we need to wake up," Warren added. "We need to use every tool we have to fight back, and in the Senate, we can start by saying no to dangerous Trump nominees like Tulsi Gabbard or Russ Vought."
This story has been updated with new reporting from Wired.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Major Public Sector Unions Sue Over Trump's 'Politicization' of Civil Service
The head of a legal group representing the plaintiffs called the Trump administration's effort to "politicize" nonpartisan federal employees "simply and clearly illegal."
Jan 30, 2025
Two unions representing federal employees filed a complaint in federal court on Wednesday arguing that U.S. President Donald Trump "illegally exceeded his authority" by attempting to roll back Biden-era worker protections when he implemented his "Schedule F" executive order, a measure aimed at removing job protections for many career federal employees.
The plaintiffs are the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), which represents some 800,000 federal civilian employees, and the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), which represents some 1.4 million public employees, including federal workers.
The unions argue that Schedule F, which creates a new category of federal employees and makes it easier for a president to remove career civil servants not normally impacted by a presidential transition, is a scheme that put politics over professionalism.
"Despite this long-standing recognition of the importance of our professional civil service and protections against its politicization, the recently issued Schedule F order announces President Trump's intent to reclassify many career civil servants into a new category of federal employees and strip away their civil service protections so that they can be more easily fired," the plaintiffs argued.
Another union representing federal employees, National Treasury Employees Union, also filed a lawsuit challenging Schedule F last week.
The order, signed on Trump's first day in office, is a redux of an executive order that he implemented at the tail end of his first term, which was later reversed by former President Joe Biden.
In a statement Wednesday, AFSCME president Lee Saunders said that Schedule F "is a shameless attempt to politicize the federal workforce by replacing thousands of dedicated, qualified civil servants with political cronies."
"Our union was born in the fight for a professional, nonpartisan civil service, and our communities will pay the price if these anti-union extremists are allowed to undo decades of progress by stripping these workers of their freedoms. Together, we are fighting back," he said.
On Monday, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) issued guidance for the heads of departments and agencies to determine which workers are subject to Trump's Schedule F order.
The memo from OPM is "broadly worded; just about anyone in the civil service could be swept up into this category," Alan Lescht, a Washington, D.C.-based employment lawyer who represents federal workers, told the outlet Axios.
OPM, acting OPM Director Charles Ezell, and Trump are all listed as defendants in the lawsuit, which alleges that Trump overstepped his legal authority when he issued Schedule F and rendered parts of a preexisting OPM rule that reinforced civil service protections and merit system principles "inoperative and without effect."
The suit argues that OPM failed to adhere to the "notice-and-comment process" under Administrative Procedure Act when it rendered those regulatory provisions inoperative.
"In just the nine days since Trump took office, his administration has repeatedly demonstrated a blatant disregard for the law in service of its political objectives," said Democracy Forward president and CEO Skye Perryman, whose firm is serving as co-counsel for the plaintiffs, in a Wednesday statement.
The Trump administration's effort "to politicize the nonpartisan, independent federal employees who protect our national and domestic security, ensure our food and medications are safe, deliver essential services to people and communities everywhere, and much more is simply and clearly illegal," Perryman said.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Labor Leaders Condemn GOP Fiscal Commission as Anti-Worker 'Power Grab'
"The labor movement stands united in our belief that slashing crucial programs like Medicare and Social Security... will make people poorer, sicker, hungrier and even lose their homes," said AFL-CIO president Liz Shuler.
Feb 15, 2024
A coalition of U.S. labor leaders spoke out forcefully on Thursday against the Republican-led push for a "fiscal commission," denouncing the proposal as an attack on Social Security, Medicare, and other programs that tens of millions of current and retired workers depend on to meet basic needs.
Liz Shuler, president of the AFL-CIO, said in a statement that a fiscal commission is a "terrible idea that would push older Americans into poverty, take away people's healthcare, and end up costing the government more."
"The labor movement stands united in our belief that slashing crucial programs like Medicare and Social Security—which millions of hardworking individuals rely on and have contributed to—will make people poorer, sicker, hungrier and even lose their homes; it also would put the pay and benefits for federal workers on the chopping block," Shuler added. "This commission is a power grab that is trying to bypass the regular democratic process by hiding behind closed doors and fast-tracking a plan that escapes public scrutiny and accountability, and rips away the security older people rely on and have paid for."
Other union leaders, including American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) president Everett Kelley, joined Rep. John Larson (D-Conn.) at a Washington, D.C. press conference on Thursday calling attention to and criticizing the proposed commission, which the Republican-controlled House Budget Committee approved with the support of three Democrats last month.
"Our members know, and they know quite well, what a fiscal commission means, because we have lived through that," said Kelley, pointing to the Bowles-Simpson commission that recommended Social Security benefit cuts in 2010 during the Obama administration.
"The new commission plans mean federal pay freezes," Kelley said. "What do y'all think about that? A commission means retirement cuts. What do you think about that? A commission means sequestration. And yes, a commission means devastating cuts to Social Security and Medicare."
The bill that passed out of the House Budget Committee last month would establish a 16-member bipartisan commission with a mandate to craft reforms to the nation's trust fund programs, including Social Security and Medicare.
If approved by the commission, the recommended reforms would be placed on a fast track in the House and Senate, with no amendments allowed.
During debate over the Fiscal Commission Act last month, Republicans on the House Budget Committee rejected Democratic amendments that would have required the commission to propose changes that would strengthen and secure Social Security and Medicare.
Supporters of the Fiscal Commission Act are hoping to attach the legislation to a must-pass government funding measure that lawmakers are racing to finish by the end of the month.
Larson, a leading advocate of expanding Social Security by requiring the rich to pay more into the program, said during Thursday's press conference that "nothing is more undemocratic" than a fast-tracked vote on policy recommendations crafted behind closed doors by a panel of 16 people.
"We need hearings out in the open on specific proposals so the public can see what's going on and everybody can add to that," said Larson. "We are a body of 435 people. The Senate is a body of 100 people. How about we do something unusual in Congress: we actually vote, actually vote on Social Security and Medicare."
"We know where the American people are," he added. "We don't need a commission."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular