Washington (AP) – A federal judge questioned the authority of the billionaire Elon Musk on Monday and his Ministry of Government efficiency, but was skeptical about a request to prevent Doge from access to sensitive data and Locked employees in half a dozen federal agencies.
US District Judge Tanya Chutkan has held an audience at a request for 14 states for a temporary ban order aimed at reducing the power of musk in the quest for President Donald Trump to reduce the federal government. Chutkan said she would govern within 24 hours.
Trump named Musk to direct Doge in pressure to reduce federal workforce and reduce or end the disadvantaged programs. The administration rejected probation employees and Trump in a decree told agency leaders to plan “large -scale discounts”.
The prosecutors General Democrats of 14 States had filed a legal action contesting what they called the “uncontrolled power” of Musk. States seek to prevent Doge from dismissing employees and access to data to the Federal Office for Staff Management as well as six federal agencies that oversee health and social services, education, energy, transport , work and trade.
During the one hour hearing on Zoom, Chutkan said that she did not think that states had shown the necessary evidence of imminent damage to deserve the intervention of the courts at this stage.
The general prosecutors argued that Musk’s actions at the head of Doge can only be taken by an official appointed and confirmed by the Senate under the Constitution. They also said that citizens have concerns about the secure management of sensitive information. The federal government has at the end that Doge acts in an advisory role, it does not need confirmation of the Senate to access the data and that the States had not shown the hunt for waste and Musk fraud.
“Nowhere my friends have offered a lamb of anything, and they could not show that Elon Musk himself has a formal or real authority to make a decision of the government,” said the lawyer for Ministry of Justice, Harry Graver.
The judge seemed to question this assertion.
“I think you are stretching too far. I do not agree with you there, ”replied Chutkan, but added that it was the merit of the case.
While CHUTKAN seemed skeptical if a temporary ban order was deserved, it seemed sympathetic to some of the statements of the States
“One of the challenges of the applicant’s request is that it is essentially a private citizen who directs an organization which is not a federal agency to have access to the whole functioning of the federal government, of the fire, rental, barrier, contract, dismissal the surveillance of the congress, “said the judge by describing the complaints of the States.
She noted that DOGE does not seem to evolve in an orderly or predictable manner, which makes it difficult to know what will follow. Chutkan asked the Ministry of Justice to submit information on past and future dismissals.
“Doge’s actions in this area have been very unpredictable and dispersed, and I have no idea if it is by design or simply because of the scope of their procedure,” said Chutkan.
Originally published:
California Daily Newspapers
