The Trump administration is fighting tooth and nail to keep the US DOGE Service’s operations under wraps, appealing to the Supreme Court to block a watchdog’s prying eyes. On Wednesday, May 21, 2025, the administration asked the nation’s highest court to halt a lower court’s order mandating document disclosures and testimony under the Freedom of Information Act, Bloomberg reported.
The US DOGE Service, led by Elon Musk to streamline government inefficiency, faces demands from Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) to reveal its inner workings. A federal judge’s ruling requires DOGE to hand over documents and make administrator Amy Gleason available for a sworn deposition. The administration argues that DOGE, as a White House advisory office, should be exempt from such public records laws.
CREW’s push for transparency began gaining traction earlier this year. On April 16, 2025, US District Judge Christopher Cooper largely granted CREW’s request to gather evidence, finding DOGE likely wields “substantial independent authority.” That authority, Cooper suggested, could make DOGE subject to FOIA, despite the administration’s objections.
Cooper’s April decision set the stage for a contentious legal battle. He approved CREW’s requests for details on DOGE teams embedded in other agencies, their system access, and their role in recommending budget cuts or personnel changes. However, he rejected CREW’s attempt to depose Steve Davis, a top DOGE official, deeming Gleason’s testimony sufficient.
The judge also limited CREW’s probe into DOGE’s record-keeping, like the use of encrypted apps with auto-delete functions. Cooper called such details irrelevant to determining DOGE’s FOIA status. It’s a small win for DOGE, but the broader fight looms large.
By May 14, 2025, the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit dealt another blow to the administration. A three-judge panel denied the government’s plea to intervene, describing Cooper’s requirements as “modest.” The panel also noted the administration missed its chance to raise a separation-of-powers objection earlier, weakening its case.
Undeterred, the Justice Department escalated the matter to the Supreme Court on May 21, 2025. Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued the lower court’s order “violates the separation of powers” by subjecting a presidential advisory body to intrusive discovery. Sauer’s claim is bold, but CREW isn’t buying it.
“While DOGE continues to attempt to fight transparency at every level of justice, we look forward to making our case,” said CREW spokesperson Jordan Libowitz. His confidence is palpable, yet it glosses over the legitimate tension between public accountability and executive confidentiality. Transparency sounds noble but at what cost to candid advice?
Libowitz’s rhetoric paints DOGE as a secretive cabal, but the administration insists it’s just protecting its advisory process. The Supreme Court now faces a thorny question: Does DOGE’s efficiency mission grant it enough autonomy to trigger FOIA? The answer could reshape how advisory bodies operate.
Judge Cooper’s schedule demands swift compliance, with DOGE required to start answering CREW’s questions within a week of May 21, 2025. The administration argues this timeline is an “unbearable burden,” though it hasn’t detailed why. Vague complaints won’t sway a court already skeptical of DOGE’s exemptions.
The DC Circuit’s unsigned order last week reinforced Cooper’s ruling, noting officials could invoke executive privilege if needed. This safety valve undermines Sauer’s dire warnings about confidentiality breaches. It’s a pragmatic nod to balance, but the administration wants more.
CREW’s case hinges on proving DOGE’s “substantial independent authority,” a legal threshold Cooper believes they’re likely to meet. The government counters that DOGE’s White House ties shield it from FOIA’s reach. Both sides are digging in, and the Supreme Court’s ruling will set a precedent.
Elon Musk’s leadership of DOGE adds a high-profile twist to this legal saga. Created by President Trump to slash government waste, DOGE’s mission resonates with conservatives fed up with bureaucratic bloat. Yet, CREW’s demands threaten to bog down that mission in legal quagmires.
The case, identified as In re US DOGE Service, 24A1122, now awaits the Supreme Court’s consideration. Cooper hasn’t issued a final FOIA ruling, but his preliminary findings lean toward CREW. The administration’s appeal is a last-ditch effort to keep DOGE’s operations out of the public eye.
For now, the battle lines are drawn: CREW champions transparency, while the administration defends executive autonomy. Sauer’s separation-of-powers argument may resonate with conservative justices, but CREW’s momentum is hard to ignore. Turns out, even efficiency crusades can’t escape the long arm of accountability.
