A federal judge's skepticism threatens to derail attempts by state attorneys general to halt Elon Musk's sweeping federal workforce reductions.
According to ABC News, U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan appears ready to reject an urgent request to block Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from terminating employees and accessing sensitive data across multiple federal departments.
The request came from 14 state attorneys general who filed a federal lawsuit challenging Musk's authority under the Constitution's Appointments Clause. Their lawsuit questions the legality of a private citizen directing widespread changes in federal agencies without Senate confirmation as DOGE implements President Donald Trump's campaign promise to reduce government size.
During Monday's virtual hearing, Judge Chutkan expressed doubts about issuing a temporary restraining order without clear proof of imminent damage. The judge emphasized that while rehiring terminated employees might be challenging, it remained possible to reverse such actions.
Judge Chutkan addressed government attorneys' lack of specific information about DOGE's activities, particularly regarding the total number of federal employees terminated. She noted DOGE's seemingly unpredictable approach made it difficult for state attorneys to demonstrate concrete harm.
The judge shared her observations about DOGE's operations, stating:
DOGE appears to be moving in no sort of predictable and orderly fashion. 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, terminate programs, all without apparently any congressional oversight.
The legal challenge represents just one of 73 lawsuits filed against Trump's executive actions since his return to office. Courts have already issued several temporary restraining orders limiting DOGE's authority in various areas.
Recent court decisions have blocked DOGE from accessing Treasury Department information and payment systems. Judges have also ordered the restoration of public health websites and databases paused Trump's foreign aid freeze and prevented the dismantling of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
The Trump administration has achieved some legal victories, including permissions for DOGE to access certain sensitive records and approval for an unprecedented federal buyout program. However, these setbacks have prompted Trump and his allies to consider pushing back against judicial oversight.
The administration has appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that lower court rulings harm presidential powers to manage the executive branch. Solicitor General Sarah Harris criticized the wave of temporary restraining orders, suggesting they interfere with constitutional presidential authority.
Trump expressed his frustration through social media, declaring that saving the country supersedes legal constraints. The administration faces at least eight more court hearings this week as litigation continues to mount.
Trump's legal team has submitted documentation to the Supreme Court claiming these judicial interventions create irreparable damage to presidential authority, particularly during the crucial early period of his administration.
The ongoing legal battle over DOGE's authority has created uncertainty across federal departments as Musk's organization continues its controversial restructuring efforts. While Judge Chutkan appears likely to deny the temporary restraining order, the broader constitutional challenge to Musk's authority remains unresolved. The case highlights growing tensions between executive power and judicial oversight as Trump's administration pursues aggressive government downsizing initiatives through DOGE's unconventional structure and implementation methods.
