Latest news with #Chutkan
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Federal judge: NM suit against Musk & DOGE can proceed
On Feb. 13, New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez (below) joined Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel and Arizona AG Kris Mayes to discuss a new multi-state lawsuit filed by 14 states against Elon Musk, DOGE and President Trump. A federal judge denied the requested temporary restraining order on Feb. 18. New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez's office announced on Tuesday that District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan, from the District of Columbia, had denied the Trump administration's motion to dismiss a lawsuit by more than a dozen states, and co-led by New Mexico, against Elon Musk and the so-called Department of Government Efficiency. The lawsuit, filed in February, alleges President Trump 'delegated virtually unchecked authority to [Musk] without proper legal authorization from Congress and without meaningful supervision of his activities.' A federal judge that same month rejected the plaintiffs' request for a temporary restraining order against DOGE and President Donald Trump. New Mexico sues Elon Musk In her ruling, Chutkan writes that two states, New Mexico and Washington, 'allege sufficient injuries' to satisfy standing under Article III of the Constitution, which limits federal judicial power. In the case of New Mexico, Chutkan notes that New Mexico's Mining and Minerals Division has been unable to access federal funding via Bipartisan Infrastructure Law grants, which it relies on to 'safeguard…thousands of abandoned mines and associated hazards' across the state. She wrote that the court also found 'New Mexico's allegations that Defendants gained unauthorized access to its private and proprietary information sufficient to allege an injury.' In describing the suit in February, Torrez said it posed a 'novel' question for the courts to consider, which is that Musk's actions constitute 'a fundamental restructuring of constitutional order and a violation of the rule of law.' Specifically, the suit argues that DOGE's actions violate the U.S. Constitution's separation of powers and the Appointments Clause, specifically the portion that requires executive appointments to have congressional oversight. In her analysis, Chutkan notes that the U.S. Constitution does not allow 'the Executive to commandeer the entire appointments power by unilaterally creating a federal agency pursuant to Executive Order and insulating its principal officer from the Constitution as an 'advisor' in name only. This is precisely what Plaintiffs claim the Executive has done.' While Chutkan allowed the suit to proceed, she did agree to dismiss President Trump as a defendant. Following Chutkan's ruling on Tuesday, Torrez released a statement calling the decision 'an important milestone for preserving America's system of checks and balances.' The AGs filed the case, he said, 'to defend the Constitution and stop the dangerous precedent of allowing billionaire donors to dismantle federal agencies, cut vital public programs, and access sensitive state data without lawful authority. We are proud to move this case forward and help bring Elon Musk's reign of terror to an end.' Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel in a statement noted that, 'The Constitution, and the Appointments Clause, are not mere roadblocks for this administration to ignore. I look forward to continuing this case in court.' Torrez noted that the case will continue even if Musk is gone. 'No one should be allowed to outsource the presidency to one of their billionaire friends or exercise executive authority without the advice and consent of the Senate,' he said in a statement. 'This is about the rule of law, plain and simple.'
Hamilton Spectator
5 days ago
- Business
- Hamilton Spectator
A judge refuses to toss states' lawsuit against Elon Musk and DOGE
WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge has refused to throw out a lawsuit that accuses billionaire Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency of illegally accessing government data systems, canceling government contracts and firing federal employees. U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan ruled Tuesday that 14 states can proceed with their claims against Musk and DOGE. The states, through their attorneys general, sued in February over the defendants' alleged constitutional violations. The states had asked Chutkan to temporarily block DOGE from accessing any data systems or terminating any federal employees. But the judge denied that request on Feb. 18. She found that there were legitimate questions about Musk's authority but said there weren't grounds to justify a temporary restraining order. Chutkan agreed Tuesday to dismiss President Donald Trump as a defendant in the lawsuit, but she refused to dismiss the claims against Musk and DOGE. The plaintiffs' attorneys argued that Musk's actions, including those carried out at his direction by DOGE personnel, are unconstitutional because he hasn't been legally appointed. Chutkan wrote: 'The Constitution does not permit the Executive to commandeer the entire appointments power by unilaterally creating a federal agency pursuant to Executive Order and insulating its principal officer from the Constitution as an 'advisor' in name only. This is precisely what Plaintiffs claim the Executive has done.' The Trump administration has maintained that layoffs are coming from agency heads and insisted that Musk hasn't been running DOGE's day-to-day operations. Chutkan, who was nominated to the bench by President Barack Obama, previously oversaw the now-dismissed criminal election interference case against Trump in Washington.
5 days ago
- Business
A judge refuses to toss states' lawsuit against Elon Musk and DOGE
WASHINGTON -- A federal judge has refused to throw out a lawsuit that accuses billionaire Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency of illegally accessing government data systems, canceling government contracts and firing federal employees. U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan ruled Tuesday that 14 states can proceed with their claims against Musk and DOGE. The states, through their attorneys general, sued in February over the defendants' alleged constitutional violations. The states had asked Chutkan to temporarily block DOGE from accessing any data systems or terminating any federal employees. But the judge denied that request on Feb. 18. She found that there were legitimate questions about Musk's authority but said there weren't grounds to justify a temporary restraining order. Chutkan agreed Tuesday to dismiss President Donald Trump as a defendant in the lawsuit, but she refused to dismiss the claims against Musk and DOGE. The plaintiffs' attorneys argued that Musk's actions, including those carried out at his direction by DOGE personnel, are unconstitutional because he hasn't been legally appointed. Chutkan wrote: 'The Constitution does not permit the Executive to commandeer the entire appointments power by unilaterally creating a federal agency pursuant to Executive Order and insulating its principal officer from the Constitution as an 'advisor' in name only. This is precisely what Plaintiffs claim the Executive has done." The Trump administration has maintained that layoffs are coming from agency heads and insisted that Musk hasn't been running DOGE's day-to-day operations. Chutkan, who was nominated to the bench by President Barack Obama, previously oversaw the now-dismissed criminal election interference case against Trump in Washington.
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
A judge refuses to toss states' lawsuit against Elon Musk and DOGE
WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge has refused to throw out a lawsuit that accuses billionaire Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency of illegally accessing government data systems, canceling government contracts and firing federal employees. U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan ruled Tuesday that 14 states can proceed with their claims against Musk and DOGE. The states, through their attorneys general, sued in February over the defendants' alleged constitutional violations. The states had asked Chutkan to temporarily block DOGE from accessing any data systems or terminating any federal employees. But the judge denied that request on Feb. 18. She found that there were legitimate questions about Musk's authority but said there weren't grounds to justify a temporary restraining order. Chutkan agreed Tuesday to dismiss President Donald Trump as a defendant in the lawsuit, but she refused to dismiss the claims against Musk and DOGE. The plaintiffs' attorneys argued that Musk's actions, including those carried out at his direction by DOGE personnel, are unconstitutional because he hasn't been legally appointed. Chutkan wrote: 'The Constitution does not permit the Executive to commandeer the entire appointments power by unilaterally creating a federal agency pursuant to Executive Order and insulating its principal officer from the Constitution as an 'advisor' in name only. This is precisely what Plaintiffs claim the Executive has done." The Trump administration has maintained that layoffs are coming from agency heads and insisted that Musk hasn't been running DOGE's day-to-day operations. Chutkan, who was nominated to the bench by President Barack Obama, previously oversaw the now-dismissed criminal election interference case against Trump in Washington.
Winnipeg Free Press
5 days ago
- Business
- Winnipeg Free Press
A judge refuses to toss states' lawsuit against Elon Musk and DOGE
WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge has refused to throw out a lawsuit that accuses billionaire Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency of illegally accessing government data systems, canceling government contracts and firing federal employees. U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan ruled Tuesday that 14 states can proceed with their claims against Musk and DOGE. The states, through their attorneys general, sued in February over the defendants' alleged constitutional violations. The states had asked Chutkan to temporarily block DOGE from accessing any data systems or terminating any federal employees. But the judge denied that request on Feb. 18. She found that there were legitimate questions about Musk's authority but said there weren't grounds to justify a temporary restraining order. Chutkan agreed Tuesday to dismiss President Donald Trump as a defendant in the lawsuit, but she refused to dismiss the claims against Musk and DOGE. The plaintiffs' attorneys argued that Musk's actions, including those carried out at his direction by DOGE personnel, are unconstitutional because he hasn't been legally appointed. Chutkan wrote: 'The Constitution does not permit the Executive to commandeer the entire appointments power by unilaterally creating a federal agency pursuant to Executive Order and insulating its principal officer from the Constitution as an 'advisor' in name only. This is precisely what Plaintiffs claim the Executive has done.' The Trump administration has maintained that layoffs are coming from agency heads and insisted that Musk hasn't been running DOGE's day-to-day operations. Chutkan, who was nominated to the bench by President Barack Obama, previously oversaw the now-dismissed criminal election interference case against Trump in Washington.
