Judge Tanya Chutkan correctly ruled that the Attorneys General who sued Musk demonstrated no harm to their states.
The interests of Congress are harmed, however, regardless of party, even if most Republicans are too stupid to realize it. Their constitutional prerogatives have been usurped. Being in the majority, however, and servile to Trump, Republicans don't care. Democrats, in the minority, have no other remedy.
Of course this is partly a political matter, in which the court might refuse to meddle, and that is arguably correct. The remedy is political in that it is to be settled at the ballot box in two years. But that seems like an awful long time to wait for the system to correct itself, and it might not.
It might take a Democrat White House lording it over congressional Republicans in the minority in the future to demonstrate to them what they seem incapable of grasping now, but of course if this stands that will be too late for them to do anything about it.
What goes around comes around, in politics as in life.
What this really is is a constitutional matter. It is about the executive branch using a novel scheme to infringe on the powers specifically reserved to the Congress. Democrats should make that their case. The court system is the traditional place to adjudicate such things.
But given outright Democrat hostility to the constitution, e.g. to the Electoral College among other things, they may just not have the heart for it.
Sad!
Judge Chutkan rejects call from Democratic AGs for temporary restraining order blocking DOGE’s access to federal data
... But Chutkan said that the states hadn’t shown “that they
will suffer imminent, irreparable harm absent a temporary restraining
order.”
“The court is aware that DOGE’s unpredictable actions have
resulted in considerable uncertainty and confusion for Plaintiffs and
many of their agencies and residents,” she wrote in the 10-page ruling.
“It remains ‘uncertain’ when and how the catalog of state programs that
Plaintiffs identify will suffer.”
Chutkan went on to say that even though the states’ larger
case against Musk is “strong,” their arguments at this stage in the
litigation were not good enough to satisfy the standard that must be met
to warrant emergency action by the court.
“Plaintiffs raise a colorable Appointments Clause claim with
serious implications. Musk has not been nominated by the President nor
confirmed by the U.S. Senate, as constitutionally required for officers
who exercise ‘significant authority pursuant to the laws of the United
States,’” she wrote. “But even a strong merits argument cannot secure a
temporary restraining order at this juncture.”...
