Pallek v. Rollins

On May 22, 2025, Protect Democracy, with co-counsel The National Student Legal Defense Network, EPIC, and National Center for Law and Economic Justice, filed the lawsuit Pallek v. Rollins, challenging a demand from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) for states and third-party vendors to turn over the personal data of tens of millions American citizens who receive help buying food through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Following our filing, the Trump Administration initially agreed to pause their demand for the personal data of millions of SNAP recipients while preparing a System of Records Notice (SORN) under the Privacy Act of 1974. However, after publishing a legally defective SORN, USDA has plunged ahead with its illegal data demands. The plaintiffs in the case have sought to block the demands in motions now awaiting decision by the court.

Background

Background

Following a March 2025 executive order by President Trump titled “Stopping Waste, Fraud, and Abuse,” the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) began pressuring state-contracted vendors to hand over sweeping datasets of personally identifiable information about millions of Americans who rely on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), an effort being led by the administration’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) initiative. In the Pallek lawsuit, the plaintiffs initially accused the USDA of exceeding its authority and violating several federal statutes, including the Paperwork Reduction Act,  and the Privacy Act.  

Before the federal court could decide on our motion for a temporary restraining order, USDA decided to slow down and produce certain required documents, including a SORN. But after a superficial effort at public disclosure, USDA renewed its data demands without fully complying with the Privacy Act, Paperwork Reduction Act, and the Administrative Procedure Act. In an amended complaint, the plaintiffs sought to block collection and dissemination of individual SNAP data in violation of the law. While the federal court declined to stop USDA on a preliminary basis, it ordered a highly expedited schedule to decide the merits of the case. We are currently awaiting a decision.

Meanwhile, in separate litigation, a coalition of over 22 states has received a partial injunction from another federal court, blocking USDA from punishing those states for refusing USDA’s demands. But states outside that lawsuit have begun to provide USDA with data in violation of their citizens’ federal privacy rights, and USDA’s SORN would allow it to disclose that data widely, in violation of the law.

Why this matters

USDA’s demand for millions of American citizens’ personal data is illegal and could set a dangerous precedent, allowing the federal government to target private companies and pressure them into breaking the law as an end run around states.

States are the new battleground for the federal government’s illegal efforts to collect the personal data of millions of Americans across the country — they must hold the line to safeguard privacy and the rule of law.

As various news outlets have reported, DOGE staffers working with Palantir are building a master database under the auspices of enforcing immigration priorities. Such a database would combine sensitive information from various federal offices — including Social Security, IRS, and HHS — in one place. 

While hunting down fraud and enforcing immigration laws provide the pretext, the reality is that the federal government is making a play for the granular data that state governments maintain about their citizens. States hold student education records, DMV files, voter history, sexual orientation and gender identity information, and abortion and medical history. 

If states surrender this information, the potential for abuse is almost limitless. The federal government could:

• Track people with autism or other disabilities (HHS Secretary Kennedy has expressed interest in a national autism registry and has already begun compiling Medicaid and Medicare data to create a “real-world data platform” that tracks autism diagnoses)
• Develop sophisticated voter suppression efforts using state voter data (since May, the DOJ has sent demands to at least 40 states for their statewide voter registration data)
• School-based targeting on political grounds, using children’s classroom schedules and disciplinary records
• Track the precise location of individuals using license plate readers
• Create lists of individuals based on gender identity or sexual orientation

USDA has proposed a reckless ultimatum: Either comply with their illegal demand for data or risk the withholding of SNAP funds. Our goal is simple: We want to keep food on the tables of millions of SNAP recipients, while keeping their personal data out of the hands of DOGE.

Plaintiffs

Plaintiffs

• Namod Pallek, National Student Legal Defense Network
• Julliana Samson, National Student Legal Defense Network
• Diana Ramos, National Student Legal Defense Network
• Catherine Hollingsworth, National Student Legal Defense Network
• Mazon, Inc.: A Jewish Response to Hunger
• Electronic Privacy Information Center

Defendants

Defendants

• Brooke L. Rollins, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture
• U.S. Department of Agriculture
• James C. Miller, Administrator of Food and Nutrition Service
• Food and Nutrition Service

Case Documents

Case Documents