Poli Alert Politics & Civics
Related Articles
A federal judge on Tuesday ruled that Elon Musk and the White House’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) likely violated the Constitution by unilaterally attempting to shut down the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).
U.S. District Judge Theodore Chuang found that the task force, led by Musk in an advisory role, overstepped legal boundaries and violated the Constitution’s Appointments Clause and separation of powers. The ruling came in response to a lawsuit filed by 26 current and former USAID employees and contractors, who challenged the administration’s authority to dismantle the agency without congressional approval.
Chuang granted a preliminary injunction partially blocking the agency’s closure and ordered Musk and DOGE to reinstate access to email, payment systems, and other electronic services for current employees. The ruling also prohibits DOGE from:
- Firing USAID workers
- Placing employees on administrative leave
- Closing USAID buildings or offices
- Deleting the agency’s website and digital archives
- Taking further action on USAID without express authorization from an official with legal authority
The Trump administration is expected to appeal the decision.
Judge: Musk Exercised Government Authority Without Legal Appointment
In his 68-page decision, Chuang raised serious concerns over Musk’s unofficial leadership role in DOGE, despite White House claims that he is merely a senior adviser.
“If a president could escape Appointments Clause scrutiny by having advisers bypass duly appointed officers and exercise significant government authority, the Appointments Clause would be reduced to nothing more than a technical formality,” Chuang wrote.
Chuang pointed to evidence that Musk and DOGE have taken unilateral actions beyond USAID, including closing the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau headquarters and firing employees at the Department of Agriculture and National Nuclear Security Administration.
The Appointments Clause of the Constitution requires principal government officers to be appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. Chuang determined that Musk effectively functioned as an officer of the U.S. government, despite lacking an official appointment.
Lawsuit: DOGE Took Control of USAID Without Authorization
The lawsuit alleges that after Trump’s re-election, USAID became one of the first agencies targeted under his administration’s plan to shrink the federal government. DOGE imposed a 90-day freeze on USAID’s foreign assistance funding, causing chaos among nonprofits, aid groups, and businesses relying on federal grants.
According to court filings, DOGE personnel gained access to USAID’s financial and personnel systems, placed hundreds of employees on administrative leave, and shut down the agency’s website and email accounts. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) occupied USAID’s Washington, D.C., headquarters, further escalating concerns about the task force’s reach.
Norm Eisen, executive chair of the State Democracy Defenders Fund, which brought the lawsuit, hailed the ruling as a major win against DOGE’s unchecked power.
“They are performing surgery with a chainsaw instead of a scalpel, harming not just the people USAID serves but also the majority of Americans who count on the stability of our government,” Eisen said.
Trump Calls for Judge’s Impeachment Amid DOJ Appeal
Despite Trump’s repeated claims that Musk leads DOGE, Justice Department lawyers have argued that Musk does not hold formal government authority. However, Chuang’s ruling found that Musk and DOGE were solely responsible for the USAID shutdown, not any legally appointed agency official.
Chuang also raised concerns over DOGE’s unauthorized access to classified government information. According to testimony, task force members gained entry to secure facilities without clearances and granted themselves access to restricted databases.
Following the ruling, Trump took to his social media platform, calling for Chuang’s impeachment and labeling him a “radical left lunatic” and “a troublemaker and agitator.”
However, Chief Justice John Roberts issued a rare public statement in response to Trump’s remarks.
“For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision. The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose.”
What’s Next?
The Biden-appointed judge’s ruling delivers a significant legal setback to Trump’s government reorganization efforts and raises broader questions about the legality of DOGE’s actions. With the Justice Department appealing the decision, the case could escalate to the Supreme Court, setting a precedent for executive authority in dismantling federal agencies.
