Judge Rules Elon Musk and DOGE’s Closure of USAID May Be Unconstitutional

Washington — A federal judge ruled on Tuesday that Elon Musk and the White House’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) likely breached the Constitution by acting independently to close down the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).

U.S. District Judge Theodore Chuang sided with a group of over two dozen unnamed current and former USAID employees and contractors who contested the attempts to dismantle the agency, which were initiated by DOGE and Musk, a senior adviser in the Trump administration who has been identified as the leader of the task force.

Chuang partially granted their request for a preliminary injunction, stating in his 68-page decision that DOGE and Musk appeared to have violated the Constitution’s Appointments Clause and the principle of separation of powers.

The judge ordered Musk and task force members to restore access to email, payment, and other electronic systems for all current USAID employees and personal services contractors. Additionally, he barred DOGE and Musk from taking any action related to USAID’s shutdown, which includes placing employees on administrative leave, terminating USAID staff, closing its buildings or offices, and erasing content from its websites.

According to the judge’s ruling, DOGE and Musk are forbidden from taking further actions regarding USAID without the “express authorization” of an agency official with the legal authority to do so.

“To deny plaintiffs’ Appointments Clause claim solely on the basis that, on paper, Musk has no formal legal authority concerning the decisions at hand, even if he is actually exercising significant authority over governmental affairs, would create a loophole around the Appointments Clause,” Chuang asserted.

He elaborated: “If a president could bypass Appointments Clause scrutiny by having advisers extend their roles beyond traditional White House functions and into significant authority with the aim of circumventing duly appointed officers, the Appointments Clause would merely become a technical formality.”

USAID was one of the first agencies to face scrutiny from DOGE as part of Mr. Trump’s broad initiative to reduce the federal government’s size. Shortly after the president began his second term, the agency—founded in 1961—was subjected to a 90-day halt on foreign assistance funding that severely impacted nonprofits, businesses, and aid organizations relying on USAID grants.

Members of the DOGE team also gained access to the agency’s financial and personnel systems, resulting in hundreds of USAID officials being put on administrative leave. Furthermore, the agency’s website was deactivated last month, email accounts were shut down, and USAID’s Washington, D.C., headquarters were occupied by U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

The unnamed USAID employees and personal services contractors filed their lawsuit against Musk and DOGE in mid-February, claiming that Musk’s actions infringed upon the Appointments Clause of the Constitution. This case is among several lawsuits that arose following the establishment of DOGE, challenging Musk’s actions and the task force’s access to sensitive federal information.

Musk’s involvement with DOGE has attracted significant attention, including from federal judges overseeing related legal disputes. Although Mr. Trump has publicly claimed that Musk leads DOGE, including during a recent address to Congress, Justice Department attorneys have indicated that he serves as a senior adviser to the president without formal authority to make governmental decisions.

Amid ongoing inquiries regarding the leadership of DOGE, the White House disclosed last month that Amy Gleason, who worked for DOGE’s predecessor, is now the acting administrator.

Judge Chuang noted that Musk and DOGE have been involved in agency actions throughout the federal government, particularly at USAID.

He pointed out that Musk, who is also the CEO of Tesla, seems to have played a role in the closure of the Consumer Financial Protection Board headquarters, and evidence indicates that Musk and DOGE “have taken other unilateral actions without apparent authorization from agency officials,” including terminating employees at the Department of Agriculture and the National Nuclear Security Administration.

“Given these circumstances, the evidence currently leans toward the conclusion that, contrary to the defendants’ broad assertion that Musk merely acted as an adviser, Musk made the decisions to shut down USAID’s headquarters and website despite ‘lacking the authority to make that decision,'” Chuang stated, referencing claims from the Trump administration.

Regarding USAID, the judge pronounced that the records before the court “do not support the conclusion” that the decisions to dismantle the agency by permanently closing its headquarters and decommissioning its website were made by USAID officials.

“Thus, based on the current record, the only individuals known to be involved in initiating a shutdown of USAID, which includes permanently closing its headquarters and taking down its website, are Musk and DOGE team members,” Chuang concluded.