Lawsuit Seeks to Block Federal Merger of Personal Data
A class‑action lawsuit filed Sept. 30, 2025 in U.S. federal court in Washington, D.C., alleges the Trump administration illegally aggregated sensitive personal records from multiple federal agencies — repurposing DHS’s SAVE system (now queryable by Social Security number) and creating a USCIS‑hosted 'data lake' containing SSNs, biometrics, tax, wage and medical records. Plaintiffs (League of Women Voters, EPIC and others) say the changes were made without legally required privacy notice or review, pose cybersecurity risks, and could lead to wrongful labeling of citizens as noncitizens and voter disenfranchisement.
Politics
Legal
AI & Tech
🔍 Key Facts
- Lawsuit filed Sept. 30, 2025 in federal court in Washington, D.C., on behalf of League of Women Voters, EPIC and five unnamed citizens
- Allegation that DHS/USCIS converted SAVE into a citizenship lookup tool that can be queried using Social Security numbers; reporting says over 33 million voters have been run through SAVE
- Claim that USCIS now hosts a centralized 'data lake' aggregating Social Security numbers, biometric data, tax and medical records, creating heightened security and civil‑liberties risks
📍 Contextual Background
- Social Security benefits are funded through mandatory spending, meaning the program's funding is provided without an annual expiration and does not require yearly appropriations to continue benefit payments.
- The Office for Civil Rights is an office within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
- Recipients of Social Security benefits include retirees, disabled Americans, and dependents of deceased workers.
- Debarment is a federal administrative process that can render an entity ineligible to receive federal grants.
- Video footage captured an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officer pushing a visibly upset Ecuadoran woman to the ground outside an immigration court at the 26 Federal Plaza building in Manhattan.
- The Department of Homeland Security released a statement saying the officer was being relieved of current duties while a full investigation was conducted and denouncing the officer's conduct as unacceptable.