Musk and DOGE's Power: A Legal Perspective

Elon Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) have been in the spotlight recently due to allegations of overstepping their authority. A group of 14 Democratic state attorneys general, led by New Mexico, sought a temporary restraining order (TRO) to prevent DOGE from accessing or transferring data from seven government agencies and to halt further workforce firings. The states argued that Musk and DOGE have acted to trim the federal workforce, agency projects, and gain unprecedented data access without the proper authority. However, DC District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan denied the TRO, stating that the states couldn't meet the high standard for the emergency block.

Read more at source.

The Judge's Stance

While denying the TRO, Judge Chutkan seemed open to aspects of the states' case. She noted that the states had raised a colorable Appointments Clause claim with serious implications. She also admonished the Trump administration counsel for their portrayal of the authority that Trump's executive order creating DOGE contemplates. The states still have the opportunity to pursue the case on the merits and file for a preliminary injunction.

The States' Perspective

Despite the setback, the states, particularly New Mexico, remain committed to challenging Musk and DOGE. New Mexico Attorney General Ral Torrez criticized Musk's 'move fast and break things' mentality as reckless and unconstitutional. The states aim to put an end to what they perceive as Musk's unlawful power grab and the destabilization of the government.