A federal judge on Feb. 18 turned down a request from a group of state attorneys general to block the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from accessing data at seven government agencies, finding the states had not met the bar for relief.
They also requested that the judge block Musk, DOGE, and people acting in concert with them from terminating workers within those agencies or placing them on leave.
The states said that Musk “is exercising unprecedented executive authority” in violation of the U.S. Constitution, “directing the agencies’ actions in ways that exceed even the authority of those agencies’ Senate confirmed leaders.”
“Evidence suggests that he has, and continues to, cut billions of dollars from agency budgets, fired agency personnel, and, in his words, ‘delete[d]’ entire agencies,” they said in the motion.
The states expressed concern that their residents’ data is at risk due to DOGE’s access to the data.
“Mr. Musk can only advise the President and communicate the President’s directives,” one told the court in a filing.
A party seeking a temporary restraining order must show they are likely to succeed on the merits in the case and would suffer irreparable harm absent relief, among other requirements.
Chutkan said the states have not met the harm standard, highlighting statements entered by the plaintiffs that say if Musk and DOGE take certain actions, then the states will suffer harm.
She said the states have put forth a serious claim that Musk’s moves violate the Constitution’s Appointments Clause, which requires Senate confirmation of top Executive Branch officials. However, she said that she was unable to act because she was not aware of any temporary restraining orders being based on an Appointments Clause violation.
“Plaintiffs legitimately call into question what appears to be the unchecked authority of an unelected individual and an entity that was not created by Congress and over which it has no oversight,” she wrote.
“In these circumstances, it must be indisputable that this court acts within the bounds of its authority. Accordingly, it cannot issue a [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.”
“DOGE was organized, enacted, created, to cut waste,” a mandate that was within its authority, she said during the hearing in Washington.
DOGE was established by Trump on his first day in office. He later directed agency heads to work with DOGE to create hiring plans, and agency leaders have confirmed they’ve been working with the department.
Multiple other cases have been filed seeking to prevent DOGE from continuing its work, resulting in some rulings in favor of plaintiffs and some rulings against them.
