Lawsuit challenges expanded federal access to TANF recipient data

A coalition of privacy and immigrant-rights groups is challenging the Trump administration’s effort to expand federal access to sensitive data collected through the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, raising broader questions for states about who should control public benefits data and how it can be used.

Three groups — Make the Road States, Common Cause and the Electronic Privacy Information Center — this month filed a lawsuit against the Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees the program, over a new policy granting state agencies and other federal agencies access to current and past benefit recipient data. Of particular concern is new access granted to the Department of Homeland Security.

The groups, led by the nonprofit Democracy Forward, argued that HHS is improperly expanding access to information maintained by state TANF agencies, including Social Security numbers and other personal identifying information, potentially allowing it to be shared with other federal agencies, private entities and used for broadly defined “program integrity” reviews.

For states, that administer TANF and other federal benefits programs like SNAP and Medicaid, the dispute comes as federal agencies are increasingly seeking access to state-held eligibility and recipient data.

John Davisson, deputy director and director of enforcement at EPIC, said the TANF policy fundamentally changes the longstanding division between state and federal responsibilities.

“The federal government does not generally have a giant pool of benefit recipient data on hand, because it doesn’t need it to conduct its oversight responsibilities,” Davisson said in an interview, adding that the new policy violates federal laws governing the privacy and disclosure of TANF data, including the Social Security Act, the Privacy Act of 1974 and the Computer Matching and Privacy Protection Act of 1988. “Fundamentally, what the changes to TANF would do is shift that balance of power dramatically towards HHS.”

The lawsuit follows similar tensions surrounding federal access to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program recipient data, including a 2025 federal court ruling that blocked the Department of Agriculture from collecting sensitive applicant information in 21 states and Washington, D.C., after the court found inadequate safeguards against unauthorized or harmful use.

Davisson added that aggregating large amounts of sensitive information across many agencies could create new cybersecurity risks, while also making the data available for uses recipients did not anticipate or consent to when they originally applied for public assistance.

“The federal government generally doesn’t have a need to collect the information,” he said, adding that pooling large amounts of personal data “makes a very attractive target for third-party hackers, including, by the way, nation-states.”

The TANF lawsuit arrives amid a broader push to use data-sharing tools and emerging technologies to improve program administration connect eligible residents with available resources. A recent report out of Georgetown University urged California state agencies to modernize the way they share data and proactively connect young mothers with safety-net benefits programs. Researchers emphasized that data-sharing efforts should be grounded in transparency, privacy and user trust.

But Theo Oshiro, co-executive director of Make the Road States, another plaintiff in the lawsuit, said the TANF policy could could undermine trust. He said the organization has already heard from recipients who are worried about applying for assistance. One member, he said, is a U.S. citizen who applied for TANF benefits for her grandchild, who is also a U.S. citizen, but feared that providing her information could put other family members at risk, some of whom are undocumented.

“She was actually, after applying, having panic attacks because she was envisioning ICE coming to her door because she submitted that application,” Oshiro said. “Facing the choice between putting food on the table for her grandchild and potentially putting her family members at risk of deportation at the same time is extremely common in this country for people to live in mixed-status households.”

That concern could affect states’ ability to connect eligible residents with benefits, particularly as agencies simultaneously invest in modernizing eligibility systems and increasing automated data exchanges. States are already upgrading Medicaid, SNAP and other benefits systems to accommodate new federal requirements, while exploring automation and cross-program data sharing.

Davisson, from EPIC, warned that the stakes could grow higher as states and federal agencies incorporate artificial intelligence tools into their benefits administration. He said consolidated databases could eventually feed “black box” AI systems used to identify suspected fraud or improper payments without adequate explanation or due process.

“If you start to incorporate things like immigration enforcement or potentially criminal penalties,” Davisson said, expanded data uses could make people “less likely” to seek benefits they are legally entitled to, ultimately corroding the social safety net and trust in government.

In addition to the nonprofit-led legal challenge, a coalition of 23 state attorneys general and two governors filed a federal lawsuit against the Trump administration, to block the policy. Oshiro said states could face difficult choices if the challenge fails, but he hopes they will continue looking for ways to protect applicants’ information.

“We’ve pushed states to step up and find any other options that they may have,” he said.

Davisson said the case represents a larger question about the future of government data governance and whether federal agencies can increasingly consolidate state-held information simply because technology makes it possible: “I hope [the lawsuit] will serve as a credible reminder to the federal government that it cannot just grab whatever data it wants from states that are administering federal benefits programs.”