Elon’s DOGE Just Got a Big Green Light from a Federal Judge

U.S. District Judge John Bates ruled on Friday that Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) can continue accessing critical records from multiple federal agencies, dealing a significant setback to unions and nonprofit organizations that sought to block the effort.

The ruling allows DOGE to move forward with its mission of identifying and eliminating wasteful government spending by maintaining access to records from the Department of Labor, the Department of Health and Human Services, and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

Just Announced

Federal Judge sides with DOGE rejecting efforts to block them from the Govt’s systems

DOGE can now look into Elizabeth Warren’s CFBP – HHS- and the Dept of Ed & Labor

Huge

Sunlight is the best disinfectant for corruption
pic.twitter.com/65VqJOGQFd

— @Chicago1Ray (@Chicago1Ray) February 15, 2025

Dennis Quaid’s #1 Warning for Americans

Judge Bates, an appointee of former President George W. Bush, declined to grant a temporary injunction that would have prevented DOGE from detailing its employees within these agencies.

The case centered on whether DOGE qualifies as an “agency” under federal law, which would allow its staff to be assigned to different departments and legally access sensitive government records.

According to Judge Bates, DOGE likely meets the legal definition of an agency, granting it the authority to continue its operations.

“For the reasons explained above, on the record as it currently stands and with limited briefing on the issue, the case law defining agencies indicates that plaintiffs have not shown a substantial likelihood that [DOGE] is not an agency. If that is so, [DOGE] may detail its employees to other agencies consistent with the Economy Act,” he wrote in his ruling.

The plaintiffs, which included labor unions and nonprofit organizations, argued that DOGE should not be considered a government agency because it was created through an executive order.

They claimed that this distinction meant DOGE was not entitled to assign employees to other government offices.

However, the court rejected this argument, finding that DOGE’s structure and function align with those of a federal agency, making it eligible to oversee records and personnel within other departments.

The ruling also noted that DOGE’s own legal team had tried to avoid the “agency” label in court, potentially to escape certain regulatory obligations such as compliance with the Freedom of Information Act and the Administrative Procedures Act.

Despite this, the judge determined that the evidence strongly supports DOGE’s agency status.

This is not the first legal setback for the plaintiffs. Last week, Judge Bates also denied a separate motion from labor unions attempting to block DOGE from accessing sensitive systems within the Department of Labor.

The lawsuit, filed by one of the nation’s largest labor unions, aimed to prevent what they described as Musk’s “imminent plan” to examine the department’s internal records.

LFG https://t.co/UNDNa3mVc7

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 15, 2025

However, the court ruled that the plaintiffs lacked legal standing.

Judge Bates determined that the unions failed to demonstrate that their members would face imminent harm due to DOGE’s access to government records.

While the plaintiffs expressed general concerns about data privacy, the court found no specific or individualized harm that would meet the legal requirements to proceed with their claim.

With the court ruling in its favor, DOGE can now continue its work in reviewing federal agency spending, a key part of Trump’s broader push to streamline government operations.

The decision marks a legal victory for Musk and his team as they move forward with efforts to cut costs and restructure federal departments.

The ruling is expected to face continued challenges from unions and Democratic lawmakers, but for now, DOGE retains full authority to proceed with its investigations into government inefficiencies.

The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of LifeZette. Contact us for guidelines on submitting your own commentary.