Sign in

Judge orders USAID employees to be reinstated after DOGE cuts

U.S. District Judge Theodore Chuang has sided with former employees of the United States Agency for International Development USAID, ordering their reinstatement and restricting further actions against the agency by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).

The decision follows a legal battle that erupted after DOGE, early in the Trump administration, moved to eliminate USAID, slashing budgets and firing workers.

Background: USAID’s Abrupt Closure

The controversy began when Musk’s DOGE swiftly dismantled USAID, a congressionally approved agency responsible for foreign aid and international development programs.

The move led to the termination of employees and the abrupt shutdown of agency operations. This decision was met with strong opposition, prompting legal action from a group of 26 former USAID workers who argued that the closure was unconstitutional.

On Tuesday, after a lengthy court battle, Judge Chuang ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, ordering their reinstatement and placing legal restrictions on DOGE’s authority over USAID.

Court Ruling: Musk Likely Violated the Constitution

Judge Chuang’s 68-page ruling asserts that Musk and DOGE “likely” violated the U.S. Constitution by dismantling a federal agency without congressional approval.

The decision states that the closure deprived elected representatives in Congress of their constitutional authority over the agency’s existence and function.

“For the foregoing reasons,” Judge Chuang wrote, “the Court finds that the Defendants’ actions taken to shut down USAID on an accelerated basis, including its apparent decision to permanently close USAID headquarters without the approval of a duly appointed USAID Officer, likely violate the United States Constitution in multiple ways.”

The ruling emphasized that the closure not only harmed the plaintiffs but also undermined public interest by stripping Congress of its power to determine the fate of agencies it creates.

Implications of the Ruling

The ruling mandates that DOGE must reinstate access to email and government resources for some former USAID employees.

Furthermore, the court has prohibited DOGE from taking “any actions relating” to USAID unless legally authorized to do so. This means that Musk and his department cannot proceed with any further dismantling of USAID without proper legal oversight.

Chuang issued a preliminary injunction, partially granting the plaintiffs’ request. The injunction blocks further shutdown efforts but does not fully resolve all legal questions regarding DOGE’s authority. A final decision on the matter will come at a later stage in the legal proceedings.

“Accordingly,” Chuang wrote, “the Motion for a Preliminary Injunction will be GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The Motion will be granted that the Court will issue the accompanying preliminary injunction. The Motion will be otherwise denied. A separate Order shall issue.”

Elon Musk’s Role and the Appointments Clause Debate

A key aspect of the case centered on Musk’s role within DOGE and whether his position required Senate confirmation. The Trump administration had argued that Musk did not officially lead DOGE in a capacity requiring Senate approval, claiming he was merely an advisor.

However, Judge Chuang rejected this argument, stating that Musk’s actions demonstrated that he was effectively running the agency.

“The record of his activities to date establishes that his role has been and will continue to be as the leader of DOGE, with the same duties and degree of continuity as if he was formally in that position,” Chuang wrote.

The judge warned against allowing the executive branch to bypass constitutional requirements by installing individuals in powerful roles without proper confirmation.

“If a president could escape Appointments Clause scrutiny by having advisors go beyond the traditional role of White House advisors who communicate the president’s priorities to agency heads and instead exercise significant authority throughout the federal government so as to bypass duly appointed officers, the Appointments Clause would be reduced to nothing more than a technical formality,” Chuang argued.

This remains a developing story. Updates will follow as new information emerges.