A federal judge on Monday raised questions about the authority of billionaire Elon Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) during a hearing on a temporary restraining order (TRO) request filed by a coalition of 14 states. The states, led by several Democratic attorneys general, are seeking to block DOGE from accessing sensitive data and terminating employees at six federal agencies.
U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who presided over the hourlong hearing via Zoom, expressed skepticism about the evidence of imminent harm presented by the states.
“One of the challenges in the plaintiffs’ motion is that this is essentially a private citizen directing an organization that’s not a federal agency to have access to the entire workings of the federal government, fire, hire, slash, contract, and terminate programs—all without apparent congressional oversight,” she stated. The judge indicated she would rule on the matter within 24 hours.
RELATED NEWS: Federal Court Schedules Holiday Hearing On DOGE Lawsuit; Judge Chutkan Criticizes Broad Request
The lawsuit, initiated by Democratic state attorneys general, challenges the authority granted to Musk under the Trump administration’s initiative to downsize the federal government. Under this plan, DOGE is tasked with cutting wasteful spending and reducing or eliminating programs deemed unfavorable by the current administration, and it has already been involved in dismissing probationary employees at several agencies.
In contrast, a separate legal proceeding saw DOGE score a win when U.S. District Judge John Bates denied a request to block the initiative’s access to records from the Department of Labor, the Department of Health and Human Services, and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Judge Bates ruled that DOGE likely qualifies as a federal agency and has the authority to access these records.
During the hearing, government lawyer Harry Graver noted, “Nowhere have my friends offered a shred of anything, nor could they, to show that Elon Musk has any formal or actual authority to make any government decision himself.”
Judge Chutkan, however, appeared to question that position, commenting, “I think you’ve stretched too far. I disagree with you there.”
Chutkan also remarked on the unpredictability of DOGE’s actions, adding that the court would need further information from the Justice Department regarding past and planned employment terminations before reaching a final decision.
The states argue that Musk’s role in leading DOGE, an entity created by an executive order shortly after President Trump’s inauguration, exceeds constitutional limits since he is not a Senate-confirmed official. They contend that DOGE’s broad powers—especially its access to sensitive data and authority to fire employees—pose risks to the separation of powers and the secure handling of government information.
The government maintains that DOGE is functioning in an advisory capacity and that the states have not demonstrated that its actions have caused any direct harm. The case highlights an ongoing debate over the scope of presidential authority and the appropriate judicial oversight of executive actions in federal agency management.
READ: ‘Morning Joe’ Panelist Compares DOGE’s Cuts To Biden’s Afghan Withdrawal That Killed 13 Americans
The outcome of Judge Chutkan’s ruling is expected to have significant implications for the administration’s efforts to streamline government operations, while also addressing concerns about privacy and accountability in the use of executive power.
Please make a small donation to the Tampa Free Press to help sustain independent journalism. Your contribution enables us to continue delivering high-quality, local, and national news coverage.
Connect with us: Follow the Tampa Free Press on Facebook and Twitter for breaking news and updates.
Sign up: Subscribe to our free newsletter for a curated selection of top stories delivered straight to your inbox.