Team Tangerine 2.0 Has Moved, After The Super Bowl Ended Tonight, To Vacate The TRO Keeping Non-Qualified People Out Of Our Private Treasury Pay Data.

The able USDC Judge Vargas in Manhattan has set a busy "call-and-response" calendar for both sides (all day and night tomorrow, Monday the 10^th), given the relative novelty (no prior Treasury Secy. would have ever let interlopers run wild inside the financial / payment systems which include private US citizen payor / payee data) and thus the significance of the issues -- and the fact that, absent this TRO, Elon Musk could keep violating several felony statutes [adopted to curb abuses engendered by the Nixon "dirty tricks" Administration operatives -- like G. Gordon Liddy] in perusing private, sensitive financial data of individual Americans [since the current, newly-minted Treasury Secy. is. . . plainly, and willfully failing to do his own sworn job, here. .

Consider that Musk, who hasn't sworn any of the required oaths (nor passed a background check -- for security clearance), as a faithful government employee -- and who hasn't disclosed all his conflicts of interest, in accessing this data AND who has been in arguable violation of the lobby disclosure laws (those are two year felonies!) for at least the last five months (if you count Congress) -- and three weeks, if you count 1600 Penn. . . is simply ignoring the legal framework every prior administration has abided by, for at least 65 years -- and is in direct violation of several felony statutes in so doing.

For what little it is worth (since it cites no case law -- as there is none to support these overwrought "emergency" claims), here is the memo of law from Team Trump at Treasury. And below is the scheduling order entered by the USDC, in Manhattan, as the streets of nearby Philly filled with throngs of revelers -- singing, dancing and drinking -- to celebrate their "Iggles" improbable win, over the Chiefs burgeoning dynasty:

. . .ORDER.

The parties are ordered to meet and confer with respect to the Defendants' Emergency Motion to Dissolve, Clarify, or Modify the Ex Parte Temporary Restraining Order to determine if the parties can reach agreement on a stipulation that either resolves or narrows the issues presented in the Motion.

If no agreement is reached, Plaintiffs' response to the Motion shall be due by 5:00 p.m. on Monday, February 10, 2025.

Defendants' reply papers shall be due by 11:00 p.m. on Monday, February 10, 2025.

HEREBY ORDERED by Judge Jeannette A. Vargas, USDC Judge. . . .

Well -- we will keep you informed -- tomorrow. In the mean time -- consider this your primer on the applicable laws being violated, as alleged under oath, by 18 State Attorneys General on Friday night, past -- all absent the now in force nationwide TRO:

. . .The Privacy Act of 1974 “provides certain safeguards for an individual against an invasion of personal privacy,” by requiring governmental agencies to maintain accurate records and providing individuals with more control over the gathering, dissemination, and accuracy of agency information about themselves. Privacy Act of 1974; System of Records, 87 Fed. Reg. 16244, 16245 (Mar. 22, 2022); 5 U.S.C. § 552a. To accomplish this purpose, the Privacy Act sets forth conditions for disclosure of private information and precludes an agency from disclosing information in its files to any person or to another agency without the prior written consent of the individual to whom the information pertains. See 5 U.S.C. § 552a(b). . . .

Agencies are required to give 30 days’ notice of new or revised SORNs, allowing public comments. 5 U.S.C. § 552a(e)(11). A SORN must include information on the categories of individuals and records in the system, the routine uses of the records, and the agency's policies on storage, access, retention, and disposal. 5 U.S.C. § 552a(e)(4). . . .

[Moreover,] Section 208 of the E-Government Act of 2002, codified at 44 U.S.C. § 3501 (“EGovernment Act”), mandates that an agency conduct a privacy impact assessment before “developing or procuring information technology that collects, maintains, or disseminates information that is in an identifiable form.” E-Government Act § 208(b)(1)(A)(i). The purpose of this provision “is to ensure sufficient protections for the privacy of personal information” maintained by government agencies. Id. § 208(a). Defendants failed to conduct a privacy impact assessment before adopting and implementing the Agency Action in violation of Section 208. . . ."

These above in green, are the grounds which USDC Judge Engelmeyer (SDNY) called "particularly strong" -- when issuing the TRO, Friday night.

In the end, I think only Treasury Secy. Scott Bessent will be "exempted" from this TRO, not any political staff -- and no non-govt. employees.

We shall see -- and all that's even though Bessent's shown a callous disregard for the felony statutes that apply inside his Department -- Treasury. Onward.

नमस्ते