Lawsuit against Elon Musk's DOGE actions survives early court challenge

An attempt from the Trump administration to squash a lawsuit against Elon Musk for illegally exercising executive-level power as the head of DOGE has failed.

A federal judge dismissed the U.S. government's dismissal request earlier this week.

“Defendants appear to make the extraordinary argument that an individual who holds an important office and wields immense power is not subject to the Appointments Clause so long as the office was unlawfully created, and the power was unlawfully seized,” US District Judge Tanya Chutkan said in her memo dismissing the request.

DOGE's actions could be reversed

Why is it significant that this lawsuit goes ahead? If the Plaintiffs win the case, this lawsuit could result in a reversal of all of Musk's and DOGE's actions, including federal cuts.

“If Plaintiffs prevail on their claim that Musk was not constitutionally appointed and therefore lacked authority to exercise the power of a principal officer, the court could vacate Musk-initiated policies or cuts that are causing Plaintiffs ongoing harm,” wrote Chutkan.

The lawsuit against Musk, DOGE, and President Donald Trump was filed last year by a group of non-profits that claimed that Musk was illegally exercising powers under the Appointments Clause or powers similar to those of a Senate-confirmed Cabinet official, even though Musk was not confirmed by the Senate for a position within the administration. 

The plaintiffs say that DOGE cut federal grants, fired federal employees, and shut down government agencies “despite lacking lawful authority.”

The lawsuit was later combined with a similar lawsuit filed by a group of 14 state attorneys general led by New Mexico.

According to Judge Chutkan, "the head of DOGE is not merely an influential advisor who counsel the President and then communicates the President’s decisions to government officers.“ In fact, Chutkan wrote, the head of DOGE "makes decisions and issues directives on matters as weighty as the termination of federal grants, contracts, and workers."

Musk's own social posts cited

The lawsuit frequently uses Musk's own posts on his social media platform X against him.

"USAID is a criminal organization," Musk posted on Feb. 2, 2025. "Time for it to die."

"What is this 'Department of Education' you keep talking about?" Musk said in a reply on X on Feb. 7. "I just checked and it doesn’t exist."

"CFPB RIP," Musk published on X in another post that same day.

Judge Chutkan also pointed out that DOGE officials publicly bragged about terminating government contracts and shutting down agencies.

All of these posts are cited in the lawsuit against Musk, DOGE, and Trump to help bolster the case that Musk was unlawfully calling the shots.

Chutkan decided in favor of the Trump administration on two claims in the lawsuit regarding the violations of the Administrative Procedure Act and violations of the constitutional separation of powers.

Musk said he was stepping down from DOGE in May 2025 and then had a public falling out with President Trump shortly after. However, the two appear to once again be on good terms.