Judge says Musk and DOGE ‘likely violated' constitution in USAID shutdown
Judge Theodore Chuang issued the preliminary ruling on Tuesday, in response to a complaint filed by 26 employees and contractors for the US Agency for International Development (USAID).
'The Court finds that 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 violated the United States Constitution in multiple ways,' Chuang wrote in his decision.
Not only were the plaintiffs harmed, he added, but the 'public interest' was also.
DOGE and Musk 'deprived the public's elected representatives in Congress of their constitutional authority to decide whether, when and how to close down an agency created by Congress', Chuang said.
As a result of that finding, the judge approved a temporary injunction that would prevent DOGE and Musk from continuing with USAID-related staff cuts, contract cancellations, building closures and the destruction of USAID materials.
'The restrictions will assist in maintaining the status quo so as to delay a premature, final shutdown of USAID,' Chuang wrote.
It was a significant blow to Musk, whose role in the government has been ambiguous – but who has wielded significant power due to his close relationship with US President Donald Trump.
A tech billionaire and one of the wealthiest men in the world, Musk is considered a 'special government employee', a temporary role often given to outside advisers.
In that role, however, he has led DOGE in a vast campaign to restructure the federal government, through downsizing its workforce, ending contracts and attempting to shutter entire agencies.
USAID was one of the first in DOGE's crosshairs. Upon taking office for a second term on January 20, Trump issued a presidential order calling for a 90-day freeze on all foreign aid – a central part of USAID's work.
Established in 1961 by an act of Congress, USAID had become the US's primary arm for distributing foreign assistance abroad.
But under Trump's order, only aid that aligned with the president's foreign policy would be allowed to continue.
Musk became the face of the campaign to close USAID entirely. 'USAID is a criminal organization,' he wrote on his social media platform X on February 2, without offering proof. 'Time for it to die.'
Later that day, Musk posted another message on X: 'We spent the weekend feeding USAID into the wood chipper. Could [have] gone to some great parties. Did that instead.'
By the end of February, the agency's headquarters in Washington, DC, was effectively closed, with employees given only 15 minutes to collect their belongings. An estimated 1,600 workers were fired, and another 4,700 were put on leave.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio eventually announced that 83 percent of all USAID contracts had been cancelled.
To justify the cuts across government, Musk and Trump have repeatedly accused departments and agencies of having perpetrated 'waste' and 'fraud', without offering proof.
Given that USAID was established as an independent agency under Congress's Foreign Assistance Act, Judge Chuang ruled that Musk's actions 'likely violates the constitutional principle of Separation of Powers'.
As part of Tuesday's injunction, Chuang required DOGE to restore USAID employees' access to electronic systems and called for the department to restore any deleted emails.
Trump allies, however, quickly slammed Chuang – an appointee of former President Barack Obama – for his temporary injunction.
wrote in a one-word reply.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Jazeera
10 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
Gaza is no anomaly: Hunger and hoarding are the West's oldest weapons
For all the West's lofty claims about spreading freedom, prosperity and progress, the world remains scarred by chronic instability and mass hunger. Last month, as part of its wind-down of international food and medical aid, the United States destroyed 500 metric tonnes of emergency food aid in the United Arab Emirates. Over 60,000 tonnes of emergency food aid have remained stockpiled in warehouses around the world due to the shutdown of USAID. Meanwhile, Israel – with US and European Union support – has been systematically starving the nearly two million remaining Palestinians in besieged Gaza, part of the almost 320 million people globally who are malnourished or at risk of starving to death in 2025. It's part of a much larger pattern of hoarding and starvation that has its roots in Western norms around capitalism and settler-colonialism, a crime against humanity that rarely faces meaningful international repercussions. This is not an isolated atrocity: The rise of the West and the US was built on the massive hoarding of food resources for profit and the deliberate use of starvation to cow those already living under oppression. It is difficult to miss, in both the international news reports and the desperate social media posts of starved Palestinians begging for money, food and clean water, with many showing themselves and their children reduced to emaciated bodies. It should shame us all, yet Westerners and their allies have all committed themselves to genocide, with ample food mere kilometres away. A recent poll by the Viterbi Family Center for Public Opinion and Policy Research at the Israeli Democracy Institute shows that 79 percent of Israeli Jews are 'not so troubled' or 'not troubled at all' by the reports of famine and suffering among the Palestinian population in Gaza. Gaza, though, is hardly alone in facing mass starvation as part of a genocidal campaign, whether in 2025 or in recent world history. What has been all too easy for the West to miss are famine-level crises in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and in Sudan. As of March, 'a record 27.7 million people are in the grip of acute hunger … amid ongoing conflict linked to massive displacement and rising food prices' in the DRC, according to the United Nations. The two-year-long conflict in Sudan, which has killed an estimated 150,000 people, many of whose deaths were linked to famine, disease and starvation, has also left nearly 25 million in need of food assistance, including nearly 740,000 in North Darfur's capital, el-Fasher, where the population faces starvation while under siege. To be sure, nearly every major power in human history has attacked or withheld food and water supplies in the process of conquering other nation-states and plundering their resources at one time or another. But the West, as the world knows it today, began its quest for global dominance with the First Crusade in the 1090s, and with it, perfected its tactics for siege warfare and the deliberate starvation of Muslim and Jewish populations in the Holy Land (present-day Syria, Lebanon and Palestine), all in the name of Catholicism. Those first Crusaders, short on food supplies themselves, also died in their thousands from hunger or committed acts of mass cannibalism to survive. Denying food and water in this Western-dominated world has always been a political and capitalistic weapon of imperialism, colonialism and nationalism. Western Europe's plundering of the Western Hemisphere not only formed the foundation of capitalism and the never-ending pursuit of profit worldwide, it also entrenched the use of famine, malnutrition and deprivation as tools to control and exploit subject peoples. From the 16th through the 19th century, the transatlantic slave trade, African chattel enslavement and forced labour of Indigenous peoples helped fill royal coffers in Europe and build great wealth for landowners across the Western Hemisphere. Enslaved and coerced labourers, denied adequate food and water, toiled in the fields to grow cash crops such as sugar, coffee and tobacco, or mined gold and silver, and frequently died from starvation, disease and abuse. One recent study estimated that as many as 56 million Indigenous people died between 1492 and 1600 alone. Outside the eventual United States, seven years was the average lifespan for most of the 12 million Africans who survived the horrors of the Atlantic crossing and arrived in the Western Hemisphere. Beyond the Americas, around 10 million people starved to death during the Great Bengal Famine of the 1770s because the East India Company prioritised collecting food for Europe's ports and imposing punitive taxes on South Asian peasants over saving lives. This famine, like so many others under colonial rule, was not an accident of nature but the outcome of deliberate economic policies that treated human life as expendable. Between 1904 and 1908, in what is now Namibia and Tanzania, the ruling Germans 'directly killed or starved to death' approximately '60,000 Herero' and '10,000 Nama' in Namibia, as well as 'up to 250,000 Ngoni, Ngindo, Matumbi and members of other ethnic groups' in crushing colonial uprisings. Perhaps the political and psychological impact of famine and bubonic plague in 14th and 15th-century Europe helps to explain both the West's penchant for colonisation and its weaponisation of food, and the denial of access to it, as punishment. As noted in the results of the 1944–45 Minnesota Starvation Experiment with 36 white men, the participants 'would dream and fantasise about food' and 'reported fatigue, irritability … and apathy,' including 'significant increases in depression, hysteria and hypochondriasis'. Imagine the psychological impact of generations of food insecurity and starvation across an entire civilisation, especially one that believed itself to be religiously and morally superior because of its Christianity. The West has been consistent in denying populations everywhere the fundamental human right to eat. As for the United States, the nation that began as the Jamestown colony in 1607 has operated under John Smith's words for the past 400 years: 'The greater part must be more industrious or starve. He that will not work, shall not eat.' America's own colonial history and post-independence expansion also involved stealing land from Indigenous groups, burning crops and ensuring famine and massive Indigenous population decline. Growing heaps of cash crops such as tobacco, indigo, rice, sugar and cotton left little land for enslaved Black folk to cultivate food for themselves. Enslavers often provided the enslaved with meagre rations such as corn mush and salted pork fatback, hardly enough to sustain life. Even when the United States became an agricultural juggernaut, the 'work or starve' song remained the same, its classist and racist message only evolving with the times. For the past 40 years, US presidents and Congress have enacted multiple bills requiring the nation's poor to work for minimal food benefits or go without, including new work requirements for SNAP (food stamps) benefits enacted under the One Big Beautiful Bill earlier this year. In 2015, then Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell summed up the thinking of US business leaders and the Western world towards those living with food precarity: 'They're doing too good with food stamps, Social Security and all the rest.' I can attest to the impact of malnourishment and working just to eat. From the end of 1981 until I went off to college in 1987, one-third of every month at home in Mount Vernon, New York, was spent with little or no food in my belly, often with massive intestinal gas pains bloating my abdomen. It did not matter whether my mother worked full-time for Mount Vernon Hospital or relied on the US welfare system for food aid. Once, I dropped from 83 to 76 kilogrammes on my 188-centimetre frame in the 18 days after finishing my undergraduate degree, while working for Pitt's Western Psychiatric Institute and Clinic in 1991. I walked the five kilometres each way to and from work for those three weeks because I only had $30 to get me through. Fantasies of hoarding food and controlling access to resources were definitely part of my experiences with moderate hunger and malnutrition. Today, the United States produces enough food to feed more than two billion people, and the world produces enough to feed more than 10 billion every year. Yet the quest for profit and markets for agribusinesses, and the continued deliberate denial of access to food for vulnerable and marginalised populations, all to subjugate them for their land, their resources and even the very food they grow, continues largely unabated. Hunger remains one of the West's most enduring weapons of control and domination. Geopolitically, there can be no peace in a world full of people whom the West has deliberately helped starve. The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial stance.
Al Jazeera
2 days ago
- Al Jazeera
Brazil plans aid packages for businesses impacted by Trump tariffs
The Brazilian government has unveiled a plan to support local exporters impacted by the 50 percent tariff imposed by the United States. Officials announced what has been dubbed 'Sovereign Brazil', a credit lifeline of 30 billion reais ($5.5bn) on Wednesday. Brazil's President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva described the plan, which includes a bill to be sent to Congress, as a first step to help local exporters. Congressional leaders attended Wednesday's ceremony, a first in months, in a sign of growing political support for the leftist leader in response to US President Donald Trump's tariffs. Other measures announced by the Brazilian government include postponing tax charges for companies affected by US tariffs, providing 5 billion reais ($926,000) in tax credits to small and medium-sized companies until the end of 2026 and expanding access to insurance against cancelled orders. The plan also incentivises public purchases of items that could not be exported to the US. The measures take effect immediately, but will only stay in place for four months unless Congressional leaders act. 'We cannot be scared, nervous and anxious when there is a crisis. A crisis is for us to create new things,' President Lula said. 'In this case, what is unpleasant is that the reasons given to impose sanctions against Brazil do not exist.' The tariffs have drastically weighed on sectors across the South American nation, including the beef industry. In July, when Trump first announced the plan, Robert Perosa, president of industry trade group Brazilian Beef Exporters Associations (ABIEC), said that the tariffs would make it 'economically unfeasible' to continue to export to the US market. Trump has directly tied the 50 percent tariff on many imported Brazilian goods to the judicial situation of his embattled ally, former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, who is currently under house arrest. In late July, the White House said that the order to impose this rate of tariffs is because of 'the Government of Brazil's politically motivated persecution, intimidation, harassment, censorship, and prosecution of former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro and thousands of his supporters are serious human rights abuses that have undermined the rule of law in Brazil'. The former Brazilian leader is accused of trying to facilitate a coup after losing the election in 2022.
Al Jazeera
2 days ago
- Al Jazeera
US appeals court lifts injunction on Trump effort to slash foreign aid
A United States appeals court has ruled that President Donald Trump can proceed with efforts to slash foreign aid payments, despite such funds being designated by Congress. The two-to-one ruling on Wednesday overturned a previous injunction that required the State Department to resume the payments, including about $4bn for the US Agency for International Development (USAID) and $6bn for HIV and AIDS programmes. But the majority opinion from the appeals court did not weigh the merits of whether Trump could nix congressionally approved funds. Instead, it decided the case based on the idea that the plaintiffs did not meet the legal basis to qualify for a court injunction. Writing for the majority, Circuit Judge Karen Henderson said the groups in question 'lack a cause of action to press their claims'. They include the AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition and the Journalism Development Network, both recipients of federal aid. 'The grantees have failed to satisfy the requirements for a preliminary injunction in any event,' wrote Henderson, who was appointed by former President George HW Bush. She was joined in her decision by Gregory Katsas, a Trump appointee. However, the panel's third judge — Florence Pan, nominated under former President Joe Biden — issued a dissenting opinion that argued Trump should not be allowed to violate the separation of powers by cutting the aid. 'The court's acquiescence in and facilitation of the Executive's unlawful behaviour derails the carefully crafted system of checked and balanced power that serves as the greatest security against tyranny — the accumulation of excessive authority in a single Branch,' Pan wrote in her opinion. The ruling hands a victory to the Trump administration, which has faced a series of legal challenges over his efforts to radically reshape the federal government. That includes through dramatic cuts to spending and government agencies like USAID, which was established by an act of Congress. Almost immediately upon taking office, Trump announced a 90-day pause on all foreign aid. He has since moved to gut USAID, prompting outcry from two of his predecessors, presidents Barack Obama and George W Bush. By March, the Trump administration had announced it planned to fold USAID into the State Department, fundamentally dismantling the agency. That same month, Secretary of State Marco Rubio also said he had cancelled 83 percent of USAID's contracts. Part of Trump's reasoning for these changes was to reduce 'waste' and 'bloat' in the government. He also sought to better align government programming with his 'America First' agenda. But critics say the executive branch does not have the power to tear down congressionally mandated agencies. They also argue that Congress has the power to designate funds for aid, framing Trump's efforts as a push for extreme presidential power. Republicans, however, control both houses of Congress, and in July, it passed the Rescission Act of 2025, allowing the government to claw back nearly $9bn in foreign aid and funding for public broadcasting. US District Judge Amir Ali previously ruled that the Trump administration must pay its agreed-upon funds with humanitarian groups and other contractors that partnered with the government to distribute aid. Administration officials in February estimated there was $2bn in outstanding aid payments due by the deadline Judge Ali set. But the appeals court's ruling has set back cases to restore the foreign aid to the contractors. Attorney General Pam Bondi celebrated the decision on Wednesday, stating that the Justice Department would 'continue to successfully protect core Presidential authorities from judicial overreach'.
