There are only two updates to PogoWasRight.org this morning. The first, a link to testimony by Bruce Schneier, offers a chilling indictment about the terrible harm DOGE has already done to each and every one of us. This second one, by Scott Greenfield, indicts the Supreme Court for its role in now giving DOGE permission to continue to harm us. Scott writes:
In a decision so cursory as to be flip, six members of the Supreme Court gave the most private, and beforehand the most confidential, of government information away. They didn’t even sell it for a decent price. They just gave it away. And with that, they murdered privacy.
When considering whether to grant a stay, this Court looks to four factors: “(1) whether the stay applicant has made a strong showing that he is likely to succeed on the merits; (2) whether the applicant will be irreparably injured absent a stay; (3) whether issuance of the stay will substantially injure the other parties interested in the proceeding; and (4) where the public interest lies.” Nken v. Holder, 556 U. S. 418, 434 (2009) (quoting Hilton v. Braunskill, 481 U. S. 770, 776 (1987)). After review, we determine that the application of these factors in this case warrants granting the requested stay. We conclude that, under the present circumstances, SSA may proceed to afford members of the SSA DOGE Team access to the agency records in question in order for those members to do their work.
Where, then, is the Supreme Court’s analysis of whether the DOGE meets these four factors? That’s it. That’s all there is. That is the complete, full, at length, long-winded, analysis. Not even a finger lifted to justify or explain why. Just a blithe “we conclude.”
Read his full post on SimpleJustice.