Blue State Attorneys General Take Aim at Elon Musk Over Alleged Federal Power Grab

A coalition of 14 state attorneys general has filed a lawsuit against Elon Musk and his newly established Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). The suit, lodged in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, highlights concerns over Musk’s extensive influence on federal operations without Senate confirmation for any governmental position.

New Mexico leads the coalition, which includes Arizona, Michigan, California, and several other states. The attorneys general argue that Musk’s unconventional authority to restructure government operations undermines the constitutional separation of powers. They assert, “Mr. Musk’s seemingly limitless and unchecked power to strip the government of its workforce…would have shocked the founders of this nation.”

The lawsuit seeks to “restore constitutional order,” asking the court to block Musk from issuing directives beyond DOGE and to declare his previous actions as illegitimate. The attorneys general reference the Constitution, which mandates that any significant congressional office requires Senate confirmation. They argue that no unelected individual should possess such expansive authority, which contradicts the framework of U.S. governance.

DOGE was created by an executive order from President Trump on January 20, with the goal of enhancing federal efficiency in software management. It supplanted the U.S. Digital Service and is scheduled to dissolve on July 14, 2026. Since its inception, Musk has deployed agents to access private information from various federal departments, including Treasury and Labor.

These agents, primarily young individuals with limited experience, have reportedly faced resistance from experienced department heads. In some instances, Trump-nominated officials have intervened, allowing Musk’s team access to restricted areas. As concerns over this access have surged, federal lawsuits challenging these actions have proliferated.

A class action lawsuit filed this week describes the agents as “hackers” and claims incidents of massive data breaches. Additionally, Musk has advocated for the dissolution of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), which he characterized as “beyond repair,” further complicating the situation. His recent social media comments calling for cuts to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) have also drawn scrutiny, particularly in light of the agency’s role in safeguarding consumers.

Legal experts warn that the attempts to restructure these agencies without congressional approval may exceed executive authority. Advocacy groups and unions are increasingly utilizing the federal court system to contest Trump’s executive actions. Although some temporary injunctions have been granted, litigation surrounding Musk and DOGE remains unpredictable.

U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols has shown skepticism regarding his jurisdiction over the USAID dismantling. Meanwhile, another judge has issued a consent order barring additional DOGE agents from accessing sensitive Treasury data, reflecting growing judicial caution regarding these executive moves.