OAN Staff James Meyers
4:00 PM – Tuesday, March 18, 2025
A federal judge ruled on Tuesday that Elon Musk likely acted unconstitutionally with his directive to dismantle the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), also halting the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from making any more cuts to the agency.
The Trump administration is likely to appeal the decision.
Maryland U.S. District Judge Theodore Chuang imposed a preliminary injunction, mandating that the Trump administration restore email and computer access to all employees who work for USAID — including those who were placed on administrative leave.
Chuang was nominated by former Democratic President Barack Obama on September 25th, 2013, and he received his commission on May 2nd, 2014.
The judge has also restricted the Tesla founder and DOGE from taking action against USAID without “express authorization” from an official at the agency.
“The court finds that Defendants’ unilateral action to shut down USAID likely violated the United States Constitution,” Chuang wrote in a 68-page ruling, giving the White House seven days to confirm in writing that access was restored to USAID employees.
The administration will have two weeks to submit documentation confirming that USAID “will be able to reoccupy USAID headquarters at its original location.”
The ruling comes after the DOGE organization shut down USAID, fired all employees, and removed signage from its headquarters in D.C. — in addition to ending programs worldwide. Soon after, the administration applauded the cutting of wasteful government funding, including $60 billion in foreign aid spending and 92% of USAID grants.
After taking back the White House, Trump was highly critical of the agency, explaining that it had “been run by a bunch of radical lunatics, and we’re getting them out.”
72nd Secretary of State Marco Rubio was named as its acting administrator.
The main legal questions asked about the actions of DOGE are what Musk’s role is, whom Trump has previously suggested is the leader of the organization. However, lawyers for the administration have stated in legal documents that Musk is a “special government employee” (SGE) of the president.
NPR also previously reported that Musk is not being paid for his work with DOGE.
In February, Vice President JD Vance responded to Democrats’ complaints regarding Musk’s DOGE involvement.
The judge continued, explaining his “reasoning” for the ruling.
“If a president could escape Appointments Clause scrutiny by having advisers 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,” Chaung wrote.
“Under these circumstances, the evidence presently favors the conclusion that, contrary to defendants’ sweeping claim that Musk acted only as an advisor, Musk made the decisions to shutdown USAID’s headquarters and website even though he ‘lacked the authority to make that decision,’” Chuang continued.
“This record must be considered alongside the fact that Musk appears to have been involved in the shutdown of CFPB [Consumer Financial Protection Bureau] headquarters as well,” Chuang stressed in his opinion.
“And there is evidence that shows or strongly suggests that Musk and DOGE, despite their alleged advisory roles, have taken other unilateral actions without any apparent authorization from agency officials.”
In response, Musk ripped into the ruling by reposting an X post from conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. Kirk stated: “the only two clauses of the left’s constitution were ‘Thou shalt have open borders’ and ‘All American money will be sent abroad.’”
“Today’s decision is an important victory against Elon Musk and his DOGE attack on USAID, the United States’ government, and the Constitution,” said Norm Eisen, a CNN legal analyst and executive chair of the State Democracy Defenders Fund — who represented the plaintiffs.
“This case is a milestone in pushing back on Musk and DOGE’s illegality,” he continued.
Stay informed! Receive breaking news blasts directly to your inbox for free. Subscribe here. https://www.oann.com/alerts
