DOGE

By Miriam Raftery

Photo by Anne Meador: Federal workers protest at Capitol (CC by NC-ND)

March 14, 2025 – Two federal judges have ruled that the Trump administration’s mass firing of federal workers was illegal.  Both judges ordered thousands of probationary fired workers rehired, at least temporarily, though the two rulings differed on the scope of agencies affected. Combined, the two rulings order that 18 agencies immediately rehire those fired, affecting a broad range of jobs from national park rangers to Veterans’ Administration workers and many more.

 The judges also issued scathing rebukes of the purge of agencies done by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and accused the administration of lying when it claimed the firings were based on performance issues, since many of the laid-off workers had extremely positive performance reviews.

U.S. District Court Judge William Alsup in San Francisco called the mass terminations a “sham.”  He stated in open court, “It is sad, a sad day, when our government would fire some good employee and say it was based on performance when they know good and well that’s a lie.  That should not have been done in our country.”

Judge Alsup ordered the immediate rehiring of fired probationary employees in these six departments:  Agriculture, Defense, Energy, Interior, Treasury, and Veterans Affairs. That lawsuit was filed by federal employees’ unions. His order lasts until  whenever the case’s outcome is ultimately resolved in court, a process that could take years.

U.S. District Judge James Bredar in New York issued a broader but more temporarily order in a case filed by Democrat state attorneys general.  Judge Breder’s order requires 18 federal departments to immediately rehire the fired probationary workers for at least 14 days, though he indicated he would consider a longer relief.

His order requires reemployment be offered to the fired probationary workers in these departments: Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Housing and Urban Development, Interior (which includes the National Park Service), Labor, Transportation, Treasury, Veterans Affairs, U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, General Services Administration, and the Small Business Administration.

However, Bredar found the states’ failed to meet the burden of proof to show illegal firings at three other agencies, which he excluded from his ruling:  the Defense Department, Office of Personnel Management, and the National Archives and Records Administration.

Judge Bredar found that the mass firings failed to provide 60 days required notice and follow other requirements,  and concluded, “The sheer number of employees that were terminated in a matter of days belies any argument that these terminations were due to the employees’ individual performance or conduct...The government’s contention to the contrary borders on the frivolous.”

Bredar also found arguments from the states compelling, noting that the lack of notice left states “impaired in their capacities to meet their legal obligations to the citizens.”

Judge Alsup bristled at the Justice Department’s refusal to make acting Office of Management and Budget Director Charles Ezell available for testimony yesterday, and suggested the Trump administration’s attorneys were withholding information on who directed the mass firings.

The Trump administration has already filed an appeal in one case and will likely do so in both.  White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt issued a statement after the ruling, saying, “A single judge is attempting to unconstitutionally seize the power of hiring and firing from the Executive Branch...If a federal district court would like executive powers, they can try and run for President themselves,” she sniped. “The Trump Administration will immediately fight back against this absurd and unconstitutional order.”

In fact, the hiring and firing of federal employees is dictated by federal law, which contains numerous civil service worker protections. In addition, many legal scholars have said it is illegal for the Executive branch to usurp the power of Congress, which created many of the agencies being gutted under the guise of streamlining government efficiency and saving taxpayers’ money.

Everett Kelley, president of the American Federation of Government Employees, said he is “pleased with Judge Alsup’s order to immediately reinstate tens of thousands of probationary federal employees who were illegally fired from their jobs by an administration hellbent on crippling federal agencies and their work on behalf of the American public.”

California Attorney General Rob Bonta, who led efforts to sue the Trump administration on behalf of states, issued this statement: “The Trump Administration’s callous and reckless mass firing of probationary federal employees has caused chaos and prevented these workers from providing critical services that affect the everyday lives of Americans, from offering support for veterans and farmers, to protecting our cherished national parks and public lands.”

Bonta added, “I am pleased that the federal district court has promptly granted our request for a temporary restraining order, which will block the Administration’s unlawful mass firing directive and reinstate affected employees. I, alongside my fellow attorneys general, will be closely monitoring to ensure that the Administration follows the court’s order.”

Sources:

https://www.newsweek.com/list-federal-agencies-rehire-fired-employees-2044763

https://www.npr.org/2025/03/13/nx-s1-5325694/maryland-court-fired-federal-employees-trump

https://www.democracydocket.com/news-alerts/judge-trump-reinstate-thousands-fired-federal-workers/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=089i2Ex5Nlw 

 https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2025/03/trump-mass-firings-doj-judge-youre-fired.html

https://www.afscme.org/press/releases/2025/federal-court-orders-reinstatement-of-fired-probationary-federal-employees

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-live-updates-president-ordered-by-judge-to-rehire-thousands-of-workers-which-doge-fired/ar-AA1yZWhw

https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/attachments/press-docs/MD%20v.%20USDA%20-%20TRO%20Order.pdf

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/federal-judges-order-trump-to-rehire-thousands-of-fired-probationary-federal-employees-234392133708

This story was originally published by ProPublica

By Brett Murphy and Anna Maria Barry-Jester, ProPublica

ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they’re published.

Photo:  Malnutrition, cc via Bing

March 3, 2025 (Washington, D.C.) - For weeks, some of the federal government’s foremost authorities on global health have repeatedly warned Secretary of State Marco Rubio and other leaders about the coming death toll if they carried out the Trump administration’s plan to end nearly all U.S. foreign aid around the world.

Enrich told The New York Times he released the memos, which multiple other officials contributed to, after learning he was being placed on leave, as thousands of others at the agency have been. The memos were circulated to the staff and obtained by ProPublica.

 

The documents identify several key senior policymakers behind the scenes while also puncturing the administration’s claims of a careful, deliberative review of USAID programming. The records also represent the government’s most explicit concerns to date memorialized by a senior official from inside Trump’s administration.

 

The State Department, USAID and Elon Musk did not respond to questions about this story. Rubio and Marocco did not respond to a request for an interview.

 

Since the inauguration, Rubio, Musk and Marocco have taken dramatic steps to incapacitate USAID, the largest foreign aid donor in the world, by firing its employees and halting operations. The global health bureau was one of the first parts of the agency targeted for mass layoffs.

 

Then, last week, they abruptly cancelled 10,000 foreign aid projects, which account for 90% of USAID’s humanitarian operations and about half of the State Department’s. Lifesaving programs that were still operating around the world were forced to close down immediately.

 

Following a series of lawsuits challenging their constitutional authority to lay off or place on leave thousands of employees and freeze nearly all foreign aid, Rubio and Marocco have defended their actions by arguing that the president has the right to cancel programs, and that they were conducting a careful review of the government’s foreign aid programs to make sure they aligned with Trump’s agenda. The administration says it is rooting out waste and fraud, while Musk has publicly vowed to destroy USAID altogether.

 

However, as ProPublica reported Saturday, officials throughout the government say the process was actually cursory and haphazard, so much so that the programs’ contract officers, who have oversight of individual programs and are aid groups’ primary contacts, had no idea what had been canceled or why.

 

Enrich’s memos offer additional evidence calling into question the administration’s claims in court while projecting the dire consequences that will play out for both the U.S. and vulnerable people around the world.

 

One of the documents said that the sweeping cuts to foreign aid promise to reignite outbreaks of preventable, deadly illnesses; fuel instability in war-torn areas; and put the U.S. at risk for outbreaks of infectious disease. “This will no doubt result in preventable death, destabilization, and threats to national security on a massive scale,” it says.

 

Take tuberculosis, which kills more than 1.25 million people a year and is already the deadliest infectious disease on the planet. New infections are expected to surge by 30% more as a result of the terminations, and disruptions to treatment will cause people to develop drug resistance, making any future treatment options far more difficult and costly, the memo said.

 

That global surge will inevitably lead to more cases in the U.S. USAID staff forecast there would be around 80 additional cases of multi-drug-resistant TB here each year because of the cuts across USAID, the memo added. Even a few dozen cases would cost the U.S. millions in tax dollars; it takes nearly $500,000 on average to treat someone with the most drug-resistant forms of the illness, the memo notes.

 

Enrich’s bureau also warned that the foreign aid cuts will destabilize entire regions around the globe. In the Democratic Republic of Congo, the U.S. withdrawal of aid has led health services to collapse as an ongoing conflict flares, the memos noted. They said more than 400 mpox patients were left stranded and that more than a million people face critical shortages of food and water, supplies the U.S. has promised to provide. Malnutrition, cholera and measles are all projected to increase as well.

 

Across the Sahel, the transition zone between Africa’s northern deserts and southern savannahs, malaria season is fast approaching. The U.S. has already purchased mosquito nets, diagnostic tests and treatments that cannot be delivered, according to multiple people with direct knowledge of the programs. Canceled programs there and elsewhere are expected to cause between 12 million and 18 million additional malaria infections over the next year, the document estimates.

 

And those infections are likely to be more deadly. Spread via mosquito, malaria is particularly lethal for children under 5. The U.S. was paying to help roll out drugs that are highly effective at preventing children from getting sick or dying. Those programs have been canceled.

 

The potential for death and the spread of disease is not new to Rubio or his top aides who ordered the mass termination of nearly all foreign aid programs, according to the documents and interviews.

 

USAID staff repeatedly lobbied to keep the most critical programs running, sharing specifics about patients served for individual programs and the likely harm of cutting them with political appointees, sometimes on multiple occasions. In response, political leadership “wholly prevented” staff from implementing Rubio’s promise to continue lifesaving aid, according to Enrich’s memo.

 

In public statements and court filings, Rubio and Marocco have said there was a waiver exemption process in place for lifesaving programs to remain funded and online.

 

But behind the scenes, the few employees remaining at USAID struggled to get basic information, like how to submit waivers to Marocco for approval. And when organizations did get an approved waiver, they couldn’t restart work because the administration still hadn’t paid them. (The Trump administration has refused to reimburse almost $2 billion to foreign aid contractors for work they’ve already completed.)

 

Agency staff had no way to send payments to organizations because their access to the financial systems had been severed, one memo said.

 

On Feb. 8, global health staff learned that Rubio planned to cancel many programs the bureau had identified as lifesaving. Those in the bureau appealed to Borkert and Mark Lloyd, an assistant administrator at the agency, to keep those operations alive. (Borkert and Lloyd did not respond to questions about this story.)

 

Lloyd asked for more information. But that same day, staffers in the bureau also received a response from DOGE. “I am hearing that Global Health is conducting supplemental reviews of awards slated for termination by Secretary Rubio and Acting Deputy Administrator Marocco,” DOGE adviser Jeremy Lewin emailed Enrich, according to one of Enrich’s memos. “This is delaying the timely processing of these termination notices and is unacceptable. … Bureaus should not be conducting their own policy and program reviews before acting on these termination instructions.” (Lewin did not respond to questions for this story.)

 

Enrich also said he received written instructions to pause approving waivers for lifesaving humanitarian assistance, a directive he passed along to the rest of his bureau, which had been working to identify the programs that needed money the most.

 

In a subsequent exchange spelled out in one memo that illustrates the frequently conflicting guidance, Enrich said that two political appointees, Tim Meisburger and Laken Rapier, along with Bokert, shouted at him during a Feb. 13 meeting that there had never been a pause, and instructed him to draft another memo to correct the “false narrative in the media that there had ever been a pause” on the bureau’s waivers for lifesaving programs. (Meisburger and Rapier did not respond to questions about this story.)

 

During a meeting on Feb. 24, Meisburger and Lloyd told those in the bureau to not bother trying to submit waivers for programs involving infectious diseases like mpox, polio and Ebola because they wouldn’t be approved, according to Enrich.

 

Then, two days later, the administration suddenly terminated about 10,000 programs across the State Department and USAID. Agency staff responsible for maintaining those contracts say they were not consulted before the move. Enrich immediately reached out to Borkert and others to warn them of the “grave impacts on lifesaving activities,” he said in the memo.

 

Borkert responded, indicating that many of the programs were terminated by mistake. “There is an acknowledgement some may have been sent out in error and we have the ability to rescind,” Borkert wrote to Enrich. “We need to identify what those are.”

 

In recent days, government officials and aid groups have told ProPublica that the administration appears to be trying to reverse-engineer its most sweeping actions to figure out which lifesaving operations were canceled. Staff have been told to report information about terminated contracts to agency leaders. It’s not clear what programs, if any, will be restored.

 

“It is an incompetent mess,” one official said.

 

ProPublica plans to continue covering USAID, the State Department and the consequences of ending U.S. foreign aid. We want to hear from you. Reach out via Signal to reporters Brett Murphy at 508-523-5195 and Anna Maria Barry-Jester at 408-504-8131.

By S.E. Michael

Photos: CC via Bing

February 27, 2025 (San Diego) -- Donald Trump and Republicans in Congress ran on a pro-life platform. But it’s clear from recent actions of the Trump administration that its leaders don’t care about babies. Its actions are putting lives and wellbeing of millions of infants and children at risk, both around the world and here in the U.S.

Cutting off U.S. Aid including food in famine-stricken areas, clean water and medical supplies without notice, for instance, means that “millions of children will suffer and thousands may die” around the world, according to an analysis by First Funding for Children. Ships laden with food were prohibited from unloading, leaving food to rot rather than save lives of starving children, CBS reports. The United Nations warns of “mass death” in Sudan from starvation and is seeking donations after the U.S. abruptly cut off all aid.

Similarly, Republicans’ Congressional budget cuts to Medicaid, school lunch programs, and the child tax credit will all harm children.

Mass federal firings by the Dept. of Government Efficiency (DOGE) include workers who ran childcare and Head Start programs and also ended a program to improve maternal healthcare for pregnant women, threatening the wellbeing of their unborn  babies.

Cuts to medical research will “will limit access to effective health care treatments and diagnostics for patients” and “threaten the ability of children’s hospitals to provide future groundbreaking cures for children,” according to a press release from the organization representing children’s hospitals.

Robert F. Kennedy Junior, the anti-vaxxer named Secretary of Health and Human Services, is considering changing recommendations for childhood vaccines such as measles and polio, an action that if carried out could put children at risk of dying or being left paralyzed from devastating and preventable childhood diseases.

The Trump administration is also pushing to deport undocumented children who entered the U.S. alone, putting their lives and safety at risk and to cut off infant assistance funds for migrant babies, as well as legal assistance for unaccompanied minors.

Cuts to the department of Education, which Trump eventually hopes to eliminate, would harm children with disabilities, PBS reports. NBC reports that if Trump is successful in eliminating the department of Education, it would harm the most vulnerable students,  such as by ending federal funding of schools, increasing class sizes for all public school students, eliminating federal funding for students with disabilities, ending civil rights protections for minority students, and grants to assure equal access to education for all children.

Eliminating waste, fraud and abuse is best accomplished by a careful, extended examination of individual programs—not slashing and eliminating entire programs and departments such as USAid and the Department of Education, nor gutting funds for children’s health research and successful childhood vaccine programs, nor eliminating childcare options for working parents, or taking away all protections for vulnerable immigrant children unaccompanied by parents or guardians.

These are politics of cruelty, not compassion. If you care about the lives of babies and children, now is the time to speak out and let your elected members of Congress know that policies harming children are unacceptable and must change.

S.E. Michael has written about medical issues for trade journals and newspapers, and is the parent of child cured of a life-threatening condition through a procedure at a children’s hospital made possible by federally funded medical research.

The opinions in this article reflect the views of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the views of East County Magazine. To submit an editorial for consideration, contact editor@eastcountymagazine.org

By Miriam Raftery

Photo via Alt National Park Service:  upside down flag hung by employees at Yosemite National Park signals dire distress

February 25, 2025 (Washington D.C.) – In what’s been dubbed a Valentine’s Day massacre, Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has fired 1,000 National Park Service employees from the nation’s 63 national parks, plus another 2,000 U.S. Forest Service workers. Additional cuts target Bureau of Land Management’s 245 million acres and other federal lands.  The action is creating havoc, including in California, which has more national parks than any other state.

At Yosemite, where the cuts have forced temporary closure of four popular campgrounds, park employees hung an upside-down flag, a universal symbol of distress, atop El Capitan as crowds gathered for the annual firefall event. 

“It’s not sustainable if we want to keep the parks open,” Gavin Carpenter, a Yosemite maintenance worker who supplied the flag, told the San Francisco Chronicle.  “We’re bringing attention to the parks, which are every American’s properties.”

Alex Wild is now the only ranger at Devil’s Postpile National Monument in California who is certified as an emergency medical technician. “I’m the only person available to rescue someone, to do CPR, to carry them out from a trail if they got injured,” he told NBC. The cuts could mean “life or death for someone who’s having an emergency.”

Fire prevention workers have also been let go, including Michael Maierhofer, a Forest Service trail maintenance worker at the Bob Marshall Wilderness in Montana. He says his crew was dubbed a “fire militia” for its efforts to help with fires in the district ranging from extinguishing abandoned campfires to aiding in larger wildfire suppression, Montana Free Press reports.

Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument in Colorado has been forced to close two days a week due to lack of staffing, the site posted on Facebook, while visitors to Zion National Park in Utah found long lines of vehicles due to not enough staff to man entry booths, CNN reports.

At Wrangell ST. Elias National Park and Preserve in Alaska, which encompasses more than 14 million acres, the only bush pilot was fired, Bill Wade, executive director of the Association of National Park Rangers told CNN. “Now how do they protect the wildlife and detect poaching activities, or find somebody that’s overdue in the park or climbers in distress and so forth?” he asked.

Without enough rangers to patrol vast areas such as Yellowstone National Park, environmentalists fear poaching of endangered or threatened wildlife and destruction of sensitive plant species.

Photo, left by Miriam Raftery: moose at Yellowstone National Park

 Beth Pratt, California Director of National Wildlife Federation, recalls that when parks were closed during the COVID-19 pandemic and didn’t have staffers there, “people were cutting down Joshua Trees” at Joshua National Park, she recalls, adding that graffiti, trash, and driving on protected meadowlands also occurred.

“There’s no real staffing plan. It’s chaotic, and there’s no leadership from the Secretary of the Interior,” said Tim Whitehouse, executive director of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, NPR reports.

 Fired workers accuse DOGE of lying in claims of poor performance reviews, with many saying they had positive recent reviews. “It’s a complete lie,” says Andria Townsend,  a fired Yosemite specialist on carnivores.  “I work really hard at my job. I have two degrees,” she told KFSN.

Richard Midgette, an IT specialist in Yellowstone who was also fired on Feb. 14, says he’s done “great work” including helping to optimize Yellowstone’s communications system and developing computer code to streamline onboarding and offboard employees.  He believes his firing is both unwarranted and illegal. Claiming poor performance without evidence is “just a legal way that they’re trying to cover their ass.”

The layoffs present hardships for the thousands of employees let go, since most were low paid and moved long distances to work for the park or forest service,  and now have no alternative jobs in the vicinity.

The National Federation of Federal Employees, the union representing Forest Service and National Park Service workers, has filed a lawsuit seeking to reverse the firings of those and other federal agency employees, a total that the union said could impact a half million federal workers, the Montana Free Press reports. The suit contends that DOGE and an executive order signed by President Donald Trump violate federal law outlining how federal workforce reductions must be handled—which requires action by Congress.

“There is no statute that expressly authorizes the President to slash roughly one-quarter of the federal workforce, imperiling the statutory missions that Congress has assigned to federal agencies,” the unions’ Feb. 14 filing in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia states,” adding that the executive branch’s efforts to “hobble agencies that Congress created” by carrying out “mass firings and a pressure campaign for resignations violates separation of power principles.”

Since the initial Feb. 14 mass firings, the Trump administration has backtracked partially, agreeing to hire nearly 3,000 seasonal workers for the summer season, Associated Press reports. But seasonal jobs are entry-level, and won’t make up for management-level employees fired, says Kristen Brengel, senior vice president of government affairs at the National Parks Conservation Association.

“You really can’t have the seasonals without the other full0time staff people who are helping to manage them,” Brengel told CNN. 

Brengel notes that national parks were already short-staffed before the recent lay-offs, operating with 20% fewer employees than in 2010. “There was no fat to trim,” she asserts.

The cuts also come after the Trump administration has voiced support for opening up federal lands including national forests to mining, logging, oil and gas drilling.

“It feels like if nothing is done to prevent this administration from dismantling our public lands and the support behind them, we could very well lose access to the trails, the mountains, the plains and the wildlife that we all love so dearly,” former National Parks employee Midgette says.

Twenty Congressional Democrats did sign a letter calling the cuts “damaging and short-sighted” and warning that the mass layoffs could cause “staffing chaos” in national parks and even lead to closure of some parks entirely.  But Democrats lack power, since Republicans control both houses of Congress and the presidency. While most Republicans have been silent on the issue, Republican Senator Susan Collins from Maine has voiced concerns over the impacts on Acadia National Park in her state.

Bill Wade, executive director of the Association of National Park Rangers, believes it’s up to the public to take action and save America’s most beloved places.

“It’s clear that the people of this country really love their national parks,” he told CNN. “and now it’s time for them to do something about it.”

East County News Service

February 22, 2025 (New York) -- California Attorney General Rob Bonta today released a statement after the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York's issuance of a preliminary injunction blocking the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from accessing Americans’ personal and private information maintained by the U.S. Treasury Department.

“We are pleased the court granted our request to further halt the Elon Musk-led DOGE from accessing millions of Americans’ private and sensitive data,” said Attorney General Bonta. “Californians can breathe a sigh of relief knowing the California Department of Justice is going to the mat for them and standing up against the Trump Administration’s chilling overreach of power.”  

Background

On February 7, Attorney General Bonta joined a coalition of 19 attorneys general in filing a lawsuit seeking to block DOGE from accessing sensitive Treasury Department material, including millions of Americans’ bank account and social security numbers. Hours after filing the lawsuit, the court responded by granting a temporary restraining order barring DOGE’s access to the Treasury Department’s payment systems and information. Today’s preliminary injunction keeps those restrictions in place pending further order of the court.

Since Inauguration Day, DOGE has infiltrated executive agencies with the goal of eliminating federal funding, services, and personnel. Starting last month, there were reports of billionaire Elon Musk and his DOGE associates gaining an unprecedented level of access to vital payment systems of the U.S Treasury.

The Treasury Department payment systems — managed by the Bureau of the Fiscal Service (BFS) — are responsible for trillions of dollars in U.S. government payments. Millions of Americans rely on the support of these payments for services like health care, childcare, and other essential programs, including Social Security benefits, Medicare benefits, veterans’ benefits, salaries for federal employees, and tax refunds. The Treasury Department’s payment systems are critical, sensitive, and incredibly vital. Given their critical importance to U.S. government operations, these systems have been highly regulated and tightly guarded — but with the election of Donald Trump, are no longer safe. 

In their complaint, the attorneys general allege the Trump Administration has no constitutional, statutory, or regulatory authority to widen access to the BFS payment system for political appointees or special government employees, including members of DOGE. 

Specifically, the court temporarily prohibits DOGE from being granted access any Treasury Dept. records containing personally identifiable or confidential financial information. The Dept. of the Treasury must submit a report to the court by March 24 certifying that DOGE team members have received all training typically required of individuals granted access to the Bureau of Fiscal Services payment systems containing personal data such as tax return information and sensitive financial data.

In addition, the judge asks for certification on the vetting process for DOGE team members and how that compares to career employees previously allowed access to the system.

“The public interest is plainly served by requiring the Treasury Department to ensure, to the maximum extent possible, the security of these systems and the information contained therein,” Judge Jeannette A. Vargas wrote.

A copy of the court's order can be found here.

By Miriam Raftery

February 20, 2025 (Greenbell, Md.) -- A legal complaint filed by 26 unnamed former and current employees in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland alleges that Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has violated the Constitution’s Appointments Clause.  That clause mandates that presidential appointments require the advice and consent of the Senate, which President Donald Trump did not seek when he appointed Musk and delegate vast powers.

Musk, without any Congressional approval, has virtually deleted entire agencies such as USAID, accessed millions of Americans’ private data, deleted government records such as health reports and  records on missing and murdered indigenous persons, and ordered mass firings, some without required authorization. Even employees charged with overseeing air traffic safety and nuclear weapons lost their jobs in the purge by Musk’s team.

“Questions regarding Defendant Musk’s and DOGE’s role, scope of authority, and proper appointment processes are not merely academic. Plaintiffs — among countless other American individuals and entities — have had their lives upended as a result of the actions undertaken by Defendants Musk and DOGE,” according to the lawsuit.

The employees, though unidentified, collectively have decades of service at federal agencies, including USAID, where on Feb. 2 Musk’s DOGE personnel broke into the agency’s headquarters and cancelled international aid programs such as those to ease hunger in Africa, Gaza and Ukraine, distribution of vaccines and life-saving medicines in countries around the world.

Citing damages to their careers and financial security, the plaintiffs are asking the court to block “Defendant Musk and his DOGE subordinates from performing their significant and wide-ranging duties unless and until Defendant Musk is properly appointed pursuant to the U.S. Constitution.”

The lawsuit is one of several filed over DOGE’s actions, though the first based on the Constitution’s appointments clause.

East County News Service

February 20, 2025 (New York) – The Electronic Frontier Foundation and a coalition of privacy defenders filed a lawsuit in New York on February 11 asking a federal court to block Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from accessing the private information of millions of Americans that is stored by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), and to delete any data that has been collected or removed thus far. The lawsuit also names OPM, and asks the court to block OPM from further sharing data with DOGE.

“We will not accept the brazen ransacking of millions of people’s sensitive data,” a press release from the EFF states. “Our case is fairly simple: OPM’s data is extraordinarily sensitive, OPM gave it to DOGE, and this violates the Privacy Act of 1974. “

OPM’s records are one of the largest, if not the largest, collections of employee data in the U.S. With co-counsel Lex Lumina, State Democracy Defenders Fund, and Chandra Law Firm, the EFF suit represents current and former federal employees whose privacy has been violated.

This massive trove of information includes private demographic data and work histories of essentially all current and former federal employees and contractors as well as federal job applicants. Last week, a federal judge temporarily blocked DOGE from accessing a critical U.S. Treasury payment system under a similar lawsuit. These violations of data privacy must not stand.

EFF Legal Director Corynne McSherry states, “The question is not `what happens if this data falls into the wrong hands.’ The data has already fallen into the wrong hands, according to the law, and it must be safeguarded immediately. Violations of Americans’ privacy have played out across multiple agencies, without oversight or safeguards, and EFF is glad to join the brigade of lawsuits to protect this critical information.”