Judge Cote Grants Plaintiffs Summary Judgment on APA Claims: OPM's DOGE Access Grants Violated Privacy Act Sections (b) and (e)(10) (AFGE v. OPM, S.D.N.Y.)

On the day of the opinion, Judge Denise Cote of the Southern District of New York ruled on the cross-motions for summary judgment in AFGE v. OPM. The opinion says: “the defendants’ motion for summary judgment is granted as to the plaintiffs’ ultra vires claim but otherwise denied; the plaintiffs’ cross motion for summary judgment on their APA claims is granted”. On the merits it holds: “Because OPM’s grants of access violated §§ 552a(b) and (e)(10) of the Privacy Act, they were “not in accordance with law.”” It also refers to “no meaningful dispute concerning the underlying conduct”, and its opening paragraph states that “OPM violated the law”.

What was not decided. The court left remedy open: the opinion does not itself order relief. A separate one-page order issued the same day directs the parties to submit a proposed schedule for further proceedings by November 6, 2026.

Strength of finding. This is a ruling on the merits of the APA claims at summary judgment, by the judge who earlier found a likelihood of success on the same Privacy Act provisions; see 2025-06-09–cote-finds-opm-violated-privacy-act-doge-access-afge-v-opm. It is a district-court ruling, and the defendants prevailed on the ultra vires claim.