BOSTON — Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell, along with attorneys general from 14 other states, announced on February 13 the filing of a federal lawsuit challenging what they describe as an unconstitutional power grab by President Donald Trump. The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, argues that Trump violated the U.S. Constitution by unilaterally creating the Department of Governmental Efficiency (DOGE) without congressional approval and appointing Elon Musk as its head without seeking the Senate’s advice and consent.
“The President cannot create a new department to restructure the federal government and certainly cannot give unchecked power to a billionaire friend without Congressional action,” said AG Campbell. “Our lawsuit seeks to put an end to the ongoing corruption and abuse of power at DOGE that threatens funding for crucial needs such as healthcare, education, and more.”
Legal Basis for the Lawsuit
The lawsuit contends that Musk’s appointment violates the Appointments Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which states:
“[The President] shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the Supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.”
The complaint further asserts that Musk “does not occupy an office of the United States and has not had his nomination for an office confirmed by the Senate. His officer-level actions are thus unconstitutional.”
The lawsuit, citing a concurring opinion by Justice Clarence Thomas, argues that Trump’s appointment of Musk without congressional oversight violates the separation of powers. The complaint references Thomas’ statement that “By keeping the ability to create offices out of the President’s hands, the Founders ensured that no President could unilaterally create an army of officer positions to then fill with his supporters. Instead, our Constitution leaves it in the hands of the people’s elected representatives to determine whether new executive offices should exist.” The attorneys general contend that by creating the Department of Governmental Efficiency (DOGE) without congressional approval and appointing Musk without Senate confirmation, Trump bypassed the constitutional process designed to prevent any single branch of government from expanding its authority unchecked.
The lawsuit states that Musk, despite lacking Senate confirmation, has “unprecedented and seemingly limitless access across the federal government” and has “asserted significant and sweeping authority across a broad swath of federal agencies.” The complaint details how Musk has exercised “powers over spending and disbursements, contracts, government property, regulations, and agency viability”—authorities typically reserved for a Senate-confirmed officer of the United States.
Alleged Overreach and Actions Detailed in Lawsuit
The attorneys general cite specific examples of Musk’s actions as evidence of his unchecked power:
- On February 1, 2025, a group of approximately eight DOGE personnel, acting under Elon Musk’s direction, entered the USAID building and demanded access to “every door and floor,” despite only a few possessing the necessary security clearances. According to the lawsuit, this included entry into a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF), a highly secure area designated for reviewing classified intelligence. The complaint states that “DOGE personnel, aided by phone calls from Mr. Musk, had pressured USAID officials for days to access the secure facility and its contents.”
- When USAID officials attempted to block access, the complaint states that “DOGE personnel, including Mr. Musk, threatened to call federal marshals” until agency staffers relented and granted them access.
- On February 2, 2025, Musk posted on X: “USAID is a criminal organization. Time for it to die.” He followed up with another post stating, “We spent the weekend feeding USAID into the woodchipper.”
- On February 3, 2025, Musk announced, “I went over it with [President Trump] in detail, and he agreed that we should shut it down. And I actually checked with him a few times [and] said ‘are you sure?’ The answer was yes. And so we’re shutting it down.”
The lawsuit said that, “Mr. Musk provided no support for his claim that USAID is a criminal organization.”
The complaint also states that DOGE personnel “secured access to sensitive materials” at dozens of federal agencies, including the Department of the Treasury, the Department of Defense, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the Department of Labor, the Department of Education, the Department of Energy (which oversees nuclear weapons), and the Centers for Disease Control. According to the filing, at OPM specifically, DOGE-affiliated personnel locked career civil servants out of at least some of those systems, giving them completely unchecked control over the systems and the information they contain. While the lawsuit does not specify whether similar lockouts occurred at other agencies, it asserts that DOGE personnel gained access to their databases.
Musk’s Statements from the Oval Office Before the Lawsuit Was Filed
Two days before the lawsuit was filed, Musk and President Trump appeared in the Oval Office to discuss DOGE’s activities. During the press conference, Musk defended his authority, saying:
“If there’s not a good feedback loop from the people to the government, and if you have rule of the bureaucrat, if the bureaucracy is in charge, then what meaning does democracy actually have?”
He continued, claiming, “If the people cannot vote and have their will be decided by their elected in the form of the president and the Senate and the House, then we don’t live in a democracy, we live in a bureaucracy.”
Musk questioned the financial transparency of government officials, stating, “We do find it rather odd that there are quite a few people in the bureaucracy who have ostensibly a salary of a few hundred thousand dollars, but somehow managed to accrue tens of millions of dollars in net worth while they are in that position. We’re just curious as to where it came from.”
On federal spending, Musk said, “If we don’t do something about this deficit, the country is going bankrupt. It’s really astounding that the interest payments alone on the national debt exceed the Defense Department budget.”
President Trump also spoke at the press conference, defending DOGE’s actions:
“Billions and billions of dollars in waste, fraud, and abuse. I think it’s very important. That’s one of the reasons I got elected. I said, we’re going to do that. Nobody had any idea it was that bad, that sick, and that corrupt.”
States Participating in the Lawsuit
The lawsuit, led by the New Mexico Department of Justice and the attorneys general of Arizona and Michigan, includes Massachusetts and the attorneys general of California, Connecticut, Hawai’i, Maryland, Minnesota, Nevada, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington.
Legal Demands
The lawsuit asks the court to declare Musk’s actions unconstitutional and to block him from issuing any further orders to officials in the Executive Branch outside of DOGE. The filing also seeks to nullify Musk’s previous actions in office and prevent further executive overreach.
As part of their request for injunctive relief, the attorneys general are seeking immediate restrictions on Musk and DOGE’s authority over federal agencies. The lawsuit calls for a temporary restraining order that would require Musk to disclose how any unlawfully accessed government data was used, including whether it was utilized to train algorithmic models or generate derivative data. The filing also demands that Musk destroy any copies or derivative data in his or DOGE’s possession, custody, or control.
In addition to these disclosure and data-related demands, the lawsuit seeks to prohibit Musk and DOGE from taking further actions that assert control over federal operations. Specifically, the attorneys general are asking the court to bar Musk and DOGE from:
- Ordering any changes in the disbursement of public funds by federal agencies
- Extending offers on behalf of the United States that would bind the government to an unauthorized appropriation
- Canceling government contracts
- Disposing of government property
- Ordering the rescission or amendment of regulations
- Making personnel decisions for agency employees
- Taking steps to dismantle agencies created by law or otherwise asserting control over them, including placing employees on administrative leave
- Accessing sensitive and confidential agency data or using agency data for unauthorized purposes
- Altering agency data systems without legal authorization and without implementing proper cybersecurity protections]
- Engaging in any other actions that violate the Appointments Clause or exceed statutory authority
Alongside the requested injunctions, the attorneys general are also seeking declaratory relief, asking the court to formally rule that Musk’s actions as a government official—including those of his subordinates and designees—are ultra vires and therefore have no legal effect. The lawsuit further requests that any future orders or directives issued by Musk or DOGE in the areas outlined above be similarly declared null and void.
