Elon Musk has publicly taken credit for leading efforts to cut U.S. government spending through the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), but legal challenges are mounting over his role and the group’s authority.
In court, government lawyers have been unable to clarify Musk’s exact position, raising questions about the transparency of the initiative.
During a hearing on Monday, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly pressed the Department of Justice for details on Musk’s role.
“Where is Mr. Musk in all of this?” she asked.
Government attorney Bradley Humphreys responded that Musk was a “close adviser to the president” but did not provide further details. The judge did not immediately rule on whether to block DOGE and Musk from accessing Treasury Department systems, as requested in the lawsuit.
DOGE, created through an executive order by President Donald Trump, has faced multiple legal challenges over allegations that it wields executive power without congressional authorization. While Musk has been the public face of the initiative, a White House court filing on February 17 stated that he is neither DOGE’s administrator nor an employee.
Lawsuits from labor unions and state attorneys general claim that DOGE has slashed funding, accessed confidential data, and fired personnel without oversight. Plaintiffs seeking to halt its activities have struggled to meet the legal standard of proving imminent harm, with judges noting the difficulty in assessing the program’s impact due to its opacity.
At a February 17 hearing, U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan acknowledged the lack of transparency but ruled that media reports alone could not justify an injunction. “I don’t know if that’s deliberate or not, but it is difficult to see what’s happening next and to predict that and come in with a concrete harm,” she said.
In contrast, U.S. District Judge Jeannette Vargas temporarily blocked DOGE from accessing Treasury systems overseeing trillions of dollars in payments. She cited concerns that a former Musk associate, Marko Elez, had accessed sensitive information before resigning from DOGE on February 6.
“Even now, weeks after his departure, the Treasury Department is still reviewing his logs to determine what precisely he accessed and what he did with his access,” Vargas wrote in her ruling.
The legal challenges have also highlighted shifting definitions of DOGE’s status. In one case, the Trump administration argued DOGE was an agency to comply with the Economy Act, which allows staff to be detailed to government agencies. However, it also maintained that DOGE was not an agency subject to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).
U.S. District Judge John Bates, who denied a request to block DOGE’s activities, described the situation as “a Goldilocks entity: not an agency when it is burdensome but an agency when it is convenient.”
As lawsuits continue, courts will determine whether DOGE’s authority aligns with constitutional limits and whether Musk’s role in federal cost-cutting efforts exceeds legal boundaries.
