A federal judge declined on Tuesday to temporarily block Elon Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency from accessing federal data systems at a slew of executive branch agencies.
The decision by US District Judge Tanya Chutkan is an early blow to efforts by a group of Democratic state attorneys general to hamstring Musk and DOGE as they undertake efforts to upend the federal workforce.
But the judge also indicated she was skeptical about the Trump administration’s statements about Musk and his powers in DOGE. Musk and DOGE’s access to closely guarded government data – including sensitive information it has collected about and from the American public – has become a battleground in the legal fight against the Trump administration’s efforts to reshape the federal bureaucracy.
The attorneys general sued Musk last week, arguing that his role in the government is a violation of the Constitution’s Appointments Clause, which gives presidents the power to appoint officials who must then be confirmed by the Senate.
The states had asked Chutkan to temporarily prohibit Musk and DOGE from accessing government information systems at the Office of Personnel Management, the Department of Education, the Department of Labor, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Energy, the Department of Transportation, and the Department of Commerce.
They also wanted the judge to block Musk and DOGE from firing or placing on involuntary leave any employees at those agencies.
But Chutkan said that the states hadn’t shown “that they will suffer imminent, irreparable harm absent a temporary restraining order.”
“The court is aware that DOGE’s unpredictable actions have resulted in considerable uncertainty and confusion for Plaintiffs and many of their agencies and residents,” she wrote in the 10-page ruling. “It remains ‘uncertain’ when and how the catalog of state programs that Plaintiffs identify will suffer.”
Chutkan went on to say that even though the states’ larger case against Musk is “strong,” their arguments at this stage in the litigation were not good enough to satisfy the standard that must be met to warrant emergency action by the court.
“Plaintiffs raise a colorable Appointments Clause claim with serious implications. Musk has not been nominated by the President nor confirmed by the U.S. Senate, as constitutionally required for officers who exercise ‘significant authority pursuant to the laws of the United States,’” she wrote. “But even a strong merits argument cannot secure a temporary restraining order at this juncture.”
Chutkan, of the federal district court in Washington, DC, was appointed by President Joe Biden. She previously oversaw the January 6, 2021, criminal case against President Donald Trump.
Warns DOJ to ‘make truthful representations’
A fiery footnote from Chutkan highlighted seeming contradictions between those assertions and Trump’s executive orders creating DOGE, which connected DOGE to agency personnel decisions.
“Defense counsel is reminded of their duty to make truthful representations to the court,” she wrote.
Other pending lawsuits accuse the administration of violating privacy law and other protections in allegedly allowing affiliates of the Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency to take control of highly restricted government IT systems.
But the lawsuit from the attorneys general focuses on the constitutionality of Musk’s role in government. During the early stage of their case they sought to curtail his efforts to shrink federal agencies, which they said served critical functions for their residents.
The states told the judge that the temporary restraining order was needed to maintain the “status quo that existed prior to DOGE’s creation with Mr. Musk at the helm – a normally functioning federal government led by individual officers at their respective agencies.”
“Without a TRO, Plaintiffs will suffer irreparable harm from the ongoing threats of disclosure of highly sensitive information and continued demolition of critical parts of federal agencies on which Plaintiffs depend,” the attorneys general wrote in court papers.
CNN’s Katelyn Polantz contributed to this report.
This story is breaking and will be updated.