You would think after other agencies got Judges rulings "nominate somebody, that somebody to get "handling PII" training in line with Fedgov INFOSEC/OPSEC requirements" this was a zero cost SEC come-back.
As for the FBI, DHS, like agencies, you enter the realms of custody of evidence, and effect on trial &c. This isn't something any Judge is going to take lightly, even SCOTUS would find it very very hard to argue against "in order to protect the rule of law as a thing in itself" reasoning. if the SEC has to wind up recommending legal action be taken, the last thing it needs is a defendant saying "you can't show me the information you used to decide to do this is not tainted now DOGE has been all over it"
You would think after other agencies got Judges rulings "nominate somebody, that somebody to get "handling PII" training in line with Fedgov INFOSEC/OPSEC requirements" this was a zero cost SEC come-back.
As for the FBI, DHS, like agencies, you enter the realms of custody of evidence, and effect on trial &c. This isn't something any Judge is going to take lightly, even SCOTUS would find it very very hard to argue against "in order to protect the rule of law as a thing in itself" reasoning. if the SEC has to wind up recommending legal action be taken, the last thing it needs is a defendant saying "you can't show me the information you used to decide to do this is not tainted now DOGE has been all over it"