Judge denies Democrat-led effort to block DOGE access, citing lack of proven harm

A federal judge ruled on Tuesday against blocking Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from accessing federal data or dismissing government employees.

U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan denied the plaintiffs’ request for a temporary restraining order, citing insufficient evidence of "irreparable harm" resulting from DOGE’s authority.

“Plaintiffs raise valid concerns about what appears to be unchecked power granted to an unelected individual and an entity lacking congressional oversight,” said Chutkan, an Obama appointee. “However, this court must act within its jurisdiction and cannot issue a TRO without clear proof of imminent harm.”

The decision dealt a setback to a coalition of 14 Democratic attorneys general who sought to restrict DOGE’s access to government personnel data. They argued Musk’s leadership role as a private citizen was an “unlawful delegation of executive power” that could destabilize the federal workforce.

“There is no greater threat to democracy than consolidating state power in the hands of a single, unelected individual,” stated the lawsuit, filed by New Mexico Attorney General Raul Torrez. Attorneys general from 13 other states, including California, Michigan, and Washington, joined the legal challenge.

During Monday’s hearing, Chutkan acknowledged the plaintiffs’ concerns but emphasized their failure to demonstrate immediate harm. “What I’m hearing is troubling, but I need a factual record before issuing a ruling,” she said.

This case is one of several ongoing legal battles nationwide challenging DOGE’s authority. Lawsuits in multiple states, including New York and Maryland, allege privacy violations, wrongful terminations, and potential retaliation against government employees.

DOGE, established via executive order earlier this year, operates as a temporary White House agency with an 18-month mandate to streamline federal operations, cut costs, and reduce bureaucracy. Critics have questioned its broad mission and the feasibility of achieving its objectives in such a short timeframe.

Despite legal challenges, Musk and his team have aggressively pursued their agenda, cutting agency budgets, laying off federal employees, and restructuring departments. The Justice Department defended DOGE’s authority, arguing its personnel are legally authorized under the Economy Act to access federal data.

Recent court rulings have bolstered DOGE’s position. Last week, U.S. District Judge John Bates, a Bush appointee, declined to block the agency’s access to records, ruling that plaintiffs failed to prove DOGE lacked legal standing as a federal entity.

The Democratic attorneys general contend that DOGE’s authority violates the constitutional appointments clause, which mandates Senate confirmation for high-level executive officials. They argue Musk’s influence is far-reaching, citing billions in budget cuts and agency overhauls initiated under his direction.

“President Trump does not have unilateral authority to dismantle the government, nor can he delegate such vast power to an unelected individual,” the plaintiffs asserted.

While Chutkan acknowledged their concerns, she reiterated that fear alone is insufficient grounds for an injunction. “Plaintiffs are presenting a generalized concern rather than concrete evidence of harm,” she said. “At this stage, I don’t see enough to justify an immediate block.”

This article was reported by journalist Jimmy.