Broadening its search for personal, sensitive information about the vast population living in the U.S., the administration under President Trump is focusing on a rich new source: databases controlled by individual states. In certain situations, the amassed data could serve to bolster federal immigration enforcement procedures – a departure from enduring conventions and practices, stirring questions over legality. It’s crucial for U.S. citizens to realize that their personal information held by state governments is actively targeted.
For example, last month, the Department of Agriculture announced to states that they’d have to release names, Social Security numbers, addresses, and dates of birth of the tens of millions of applicants who received federal food assistance from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) over the previous five-year period, with the threat of potential loss of federal funds looming. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has compelled states and localities to disgorge records, including intimately personal details of noncitizens, even those related to California’s support program specifically intended for low-income, elderly or disabled legal immigrants who don’t qualify for Social Security payouts.
Information pertaining to millions of Medicaid beneficiaries from selected states was disclosed by federal health officers to the Department of Homeland Security, responsible for managing immigration enforcement. An executive order signed by President Trump in March, titled ‘Stopping Waste, Fraud and Abuse by Eliminating Information Silos,’ has contributed to integrating data by allowing unobstructed access to data from state programs, including data controlled by third parties, that receive federal funding.
This executive order suggests that sharing data can aid in curtailing ‘bureaucratic redundancy and inefficiency’ while improving the Government’s ability to identify over payments and fraud. Though the sharing of data between government bodies can certainly increase efficiencies, it also risks contravening federal laws, which aim to safeguard against the federal government having unrestricted access to personal information.
The federal agencies are held accountable by the Privacy Act of 1974, which requires these agencies to disclose how they plan to employ and protect personal data before starting the collection process, preventing them from exceeding the stated objectives. There are serious concerns among privacy experts over possible severe consequences if federal agencies can freely procure sensitive information, presently accessible only to the states, and use it without restrictions.
There are fears that this data might empower the federal government to develop comprehensive surveillance tools that could potentially be deployed on all U.S. residents. In foreign contexts, such data has been employed to suppress opposition on a massive scale. Nevertheless, the spokesman for the White House spoke in defense of the data extraction endeavors of the Trump administration, dismissing critics as prejudiced, stating that the President is optimizing data compilation across agencies to amplify government efficiency and safeguard taxpayers’ funds.
The Trump administration has been amalgamating data throughout federal government with the stated objective of identifying and eradicating waste, fraud, and abuse. This includes hunting for instances of noncitizens unlawfully availing public benefits. Simultaneously, this approach also presents the potential to aid the administration’s tracking of noncitizens and ramping up deportations.
Initially steered by tech billionaire Elon Musk, the Department of Government Efficiency has played a significant role in amalgamating federal databases for these purposes. They have accessed several core federal databases, and DHS reached agreements with the Internal Revenue Service and Housing and Urban Development earlier this year to obtain noncitizens’ data.
The current month has seen a prominent instance of sharing sensitive state information across federal agencies; a Medicaid data transfer. Senior officers from the Department of Health and Human Services reportedly commanded the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services staff to supply DHS with sensitive information concerning millions of Medicaid constituents from several states.
The state-specific data transferred was met with strong objections from state leaders. The allegations are that the move could violate the federal Privacy Act of 1974, the Social Security Act, and HIPAA, the health privacy law. Consequently, the state’s U.S senators have called for the destruction of the Medicaid data received by DHS.
Despite the pledge of the state to share detailed Medicaid data with CMS, the current exchange has had state official concerned about its security and confidentiality. Andrew Nixon, a spokesperson for Health and Human Services, insists the data exchange was ‘lawful interagency data sharing with DHS’ and forms part of an attempt to control states who might be improperly using federal Medicaid resources to subsidize care for illegal immigrants.
This call for Medicaid data follows hot on the heels of USDA’s directions to states last month to surrender personal information for tens of millions of SNAP beneficiaries. Though several states have agreed to cooperate, there has been some discord on the matter. When sued over violating federal privacy laws, a USDA official swore in court that no data would be gathered until all legal requirements have been satisfied and data safeguarding mechanisms are in place.
Detractors of the administration’s current data sharing protocol bring up Project 2025, a vast proposed framework penned by conservative supporters for Trump’s potential second term. It had suggested accessing new state data sources for purposes encompassing immigration enforcement. This would involve making federal grants to states and localities contingent on complete data sharing in the context of federal law enforcement and immigration enforcement.
Legal and privacy conundrums put states in a difficult position when it comes to sharing data. The compelling needs of effective government and law enforcement, as well as respect for individual privacy rights, need to be balanced carefully. States are being compelled to consider their responses very carefully, particularly when there is the potential for infringing state privacy laws by inappropriately releasing records. States should think carefully about how to respond and should prioritize the protection of information.
The post President Trump’s Administration Targets State Data for Immigration Enforcement appeared first on Real News Now.
About Author
