• A federal judge has allowed a lawsuit against Elon Musk's role in DOGE to continue.
• The court found that Musk wields significant power without congressional approval.
• The lawsuit involves a coalition of 14 states, led by New Mexico.
• The judge dismissed Trump as a defendant, citing constitutional protections.
• Concerns have been raised about Musk's bypassing of formal appointment processes.

A U.S. federal judge has ruled that a lawsuit brought by a coalition of 14 states against Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) can proceed, highlighting that Musk appears to hold substantial authority in the federal government without proper congressional appointment. The judge, Tanya Chutkan, stated that Musk's role as a "special government employee" allows him to wield power comparable to that of Senate-confirmed officials, a point brought up by the states' attorneys general in their suit, which claims he has operated without legal authority across the Executive Branch, reportedly impacting federal expenditures and agency operations, according to aa and The Hill.

Judge Chutkan's decision emphasized that the coalition, led by state attorneys general from New Mexico and including others like Michigan and California, has effectively argued that Musk’s role contravenes the Appointments Clause of the U.S. Constitution, allowing for unchecked power to make decisions that affect federal agencies and administration operations. The states have condemned the establishment of DOGE under an Executive Order, which they contend circumvents the traditional appointment process necessary for significant government roles, according to NPR and The Hill.

The judge also dismissed President Trump as a defendant in the case, designating that the court cannot enjoin the President while he performs official duties. This ruling illustrates the complex legal landscape surrounding Musk's influence, with statements from Musk himself and others in the Trump administration casting him as a leader of DOGE, despite claims from Musk's legal team attempting to downplay his role. The White House has not yet commented on the ongoing case and its implications, as reported by aa and NPR.

As the litigation unfolds, state officials have expressed optimism about the ruling, claiming it embodies an essential check on power. Attorney General Raúl Torrez of New Mexico pointed out the necessity of holding individuals accountable who purportedly wield executive authority absent the Senate's approval. He argued that Musk’s potential detachment from government duties does not absolve him of responsibility for actions taken during his term, indicating the lawsuit's persistence will continue to challenge Musk's role, according to The Hill and NPR.