US attorneys general challenge Elon Musk’s authority over DOGE

A coalition of attorneys general from 14 U.S. states has filed a lawsuit against billionaire Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), seeking to curb what they describe as unchecked authority. The lawsuit, submitted to a federal court in Washington, D.C., argues that Musk's actions at the helm of DOGE should only be undertaken by a Senate-confirmed official, not an unelected individual.

The legal action aims to block Musk from issuing directives affecting federal employees and accessing sensitive government financial systems. Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel, speaking alongside her counterparts from Arizona and New Mexico, stated that the court must invalidate Musk’s directives and issue a restraining order against his influence over the federal executive branch.

The lawsuit highlights concerns about DOGE’s potential impact on public sector workers, including those in law enforcement, healthcare, and education. The attorneys general demand that Musk disclose any data obtained unlawfully, eliminate unauthorized access, and refrain from altering public fund distributions. They argue that consolidating power under a single, unelected leader poses a significant risk to democracy.

This legal battle comes amid broader efforts by the Trump administration to reduce the federal workforce, including recent executive orders instructing agencies to lay off probationary employees. Civil service unions have also taken legal action to prevent DOGE from accessing personnel records.

New Mexico Attorney General Raul Torrez condemned Musk’s role, likening his unchecked power to the threats posed by historical monarchs. He also criticized Trump for using Musk to implement controversial policies instead of pursuing legislative action through Congress.

Established by executive order on January 20, 2025, DOGE operates outside the traditional congressional framework, with little transparency regarding its budget and staffing. The lawsuit underscores growing concerns over its authority and the broader implications for governance in the United States.