Elon Musk walks to the Dwight D. Eisenhower Executive Office Building, where the SpaceX and Tesla chief executive officer is leading the Department of Government Efficiency. On Tuesday, a federal judge denied 14 Democratic states a temporary restraining order that would have blocked DOGE from accessing federal agencies. Photo by Bonnie Cash/UPI |
License PhotoFeb. 19 (UPI) — U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan rejected the request of 14 Democratic state attorneys general Tuesday that would have immediately blocked Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency from firing federal workers and accessing data at seven federal agencies.
In her 10-page ruling, Chutkan said the states had not made their case of “irreparable harm” to justify a temporary restraining order, as Musk and his team work to cut trillions of dollars of government spending in what they call the “waste and abuse of American tax dollars.”
“In these circumstances, it must be indisputable that this court acts within the bounds of its authority,” Chutkan, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, wrote Tuesday.
“Accordingly, it cannot issue a temporary restraining order, especially one as wide-ranging as plaintiffs’ request, without clear evidence of imminent, irreparable harm to these plaintiffs. The current record does not meet that standard,” Chutkan added.
The multi-state lawsuit was filed last week in an effort to stop Musk from what it called an “unlawful delegation of executive power.”
“Allowing one individual to flout the law without consequence threatens our entire constitutional system,” Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes said in a statement Thursday. “We cannot allow our democratic processes to be hijacked by immense wealth and privilege.”
“Without a temporary restraining order, plaintiffs will suffer irreparable harm from the ongoing threats of disclosure of highly sensitive information and continued demolition of critical parts of federal agencies on which plaintiffs depend,” the attorneys general for the states wrote.
In the lawsuit, the states argued Musk’s role at DOGE violates the Constitution’s appointments clause, which requires “principal officers” of the executive branch be formally appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate.
“Plaintiffs raise a colorable Appointments Clause claim with serious implications,” Chutkan wrote in Tuesday’s ruling.
“Musk has not been nominated by the president nor confirmed by the U.S. Senate, as constitutionally required for officers who exercise ‘significant authority pursuant to the laws of the United States,'” Chutkan continued. “But even a strong merits argument cannot secure a temporary restraining order at this juncture.”
On Monday, Chutkan warned she could not justify an immediate order against DOGE because the states’ evidence relied on news reports.
“The court can’t act based on media reports. We can’t do that,” she argued.
“The court is aware that DOGE’s unpredictable actions have resulted in considerable uncertainty and confusion for plaintiffs and many of their agencies and residents,” Chutkan wrote. “It remains ‘uncertain’ when and how the catalog of state programs that plaintiffs identify will suffer.”
