Search Articles
WASHINGTON (CN) — A coalition of 14 state attorneys general sued Elon Musk and his so-called Department of Government Efficiency on Thursday, challenging the billionaire’s unprecedented influence over the federal government despite never being nominated or confirmed by the Senate to a governmental office.
“Mr. Musk’s seemingly limitless and unchecked power to strip the government of its workforce and eliminate entire departments with the stroke of a pen or click of a mouse would have been shocking to those who one this country’s independence,” the states say in the suit.
New Mexico leads the suit, brought in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Arizona, Michigan, California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington state joined as plaintiffs.
The attorneys general ask a federal judge to “restore constitutional order,” enjoin Musk from issuing orders to anyone in the executive branch outside of DOGE itself and declare all his actions to date as illegal and without effect.
They point to the Constitution’s appointments clause, which the framers crafted to buttress the separation of powers by specifically requiring that Congress must create an office before a president can fill it, and that the Senate confirm any nominee to said office.
“There is no office of the United States, other than the president, with the full power of the executive branch, and the sweeping authority now vested in a single unelected and unconfirmed individual is antithetical to the nation’s entire constitutional structure,” the states say.
President Donald Trump created DOGE on Jan. 20 via executive action, with the stated purpose of modernizing federal software and “maximize governmental efficiency and productivity.” The order replaced the previous U.S. Digital Service, a temporary government organization, with DOGE and established a July 14, 2026 termination date.
In the 24 days since, Musk has tasked several nongovernmental DOGE agents with gaining access to sensitive systems and information at the Treasury Department, the Labor Department, the U.S. Agency for International Development, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and others.
When the agents — mainly young men between 19 and 25 years old with limited experience outside of Musk’s companies — faced resistance from certain department heads, such as at the Bureau of the Fiscal Service, Trump nominees have removed those individuals and granted the agents access.
Department heads, Musk and DOGE have been targeted with an ever-increasing number of federal lawsuits challenging such unfettered access to highly sensitive systems.
In a class action filed on Tuesday, government employees described the agents as “hackers” and the disclosure as the “largest data breach and the largest IT security breach” in American history.
Trump has moved, at Musk’s urging, to shut down the USAID over claims that the humanitarian aid agency is rife with fraud. Musk has described the agency as a “ball of worms” and “beyond repair,” repeating false conspiracy theories regarding many of the agencies currently paused federal funding programs and contracts.
Musk also targeted the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau this past weekend, posting on X last Friday “CFPB RIP.”
The agency, which supervises financial institutions, promulgates rules to protect consumers and enforces consumer protection laws, was ordered to halt nearly all of its work on Feb. 8.
The order followed an announcement for “X Money,” a digital payment service that would link with X, formerly Twitter, that would have come under strict scrutiny by the consumer protection agency, which has also been skeptical of similar payment platforms by Apple and Meta.
Experts have condemned the moves against USAID and the consumer protection agency because they were both created by Congress, and any reshaping effort without their consent would be an overstep of the executive’s authority.
The E. Barrett Prettyman federal courthouse in Washington, along with others across the country, have become the avenue for advocacy groups, unions and federal employees to challenge Trump’s wide-ranging executive actions in recent weeks.
While some judges have granted requested temporary injunctions against orders, such as those aiming to rescind birthright citizenship and restrict federal funding related to DEI policies and transgender health care, plaintiffs specifically challenging Musk and his DOGE team’s conduct in Washington have seen mixed success.
Earlier on Thursday, U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols, a Trump appointee, expressed doubt that he had jurisdiction to halt the dismantling of the USAID, noting that any resulting injuries to employees would likely need to move through employment enforcement authorities like the Merit Systems Protection Board.
In a lawsuit challenging DOGE access to Treasury data, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, a Bill Clinton appointee, approved a consent order preventing any additional DOGE agents, besides two who were made Treasury employees last week, from accessing the department’s sensitive data systems.
Follow @Ryan_KnappySubscribe to our free newsletters
Our weekly newsletter Closing Arguments offers the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world, while the monthly Under the Lights dishes the legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.