Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

mahatmakanejeeves

(64,712 posts)
9. Additional information:
Wed May 14, 2025, 03:18 PM
May 14
Lawsuits involving the Department of Government Efficiency

{snip}

Public records and record-keeping requirements
On February 11, watchdog organization American Oversight [Wikidata] filed a lawsuit to gain access to all of Musk's communications involving the termination of employees across the federal government. Its lawsuit states that DOGE is subject to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

On February 19, the nonpartisan watchdog group Project on Government Oversight sued Trump, DOGE, and the DOGE administrator over the claim that DOGE records are subject to the Presidential Records Act, and therefore not subject to public records requests. The lawsuit argues that DOGE is subject to the Federal Records Act since it is acting like a federal agency.

On February 20, watchdog organization Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington sued DOGE to produce documents via the Freedom of Information Act.[107] On March 10, the presiding judge, Christopher R. Cooper, ordered DOGE to produce the documents for CREW, finding that DOGE's "secrecy" and "rapid pace" warranted "quick release of information about its structure and activities".[108][109] While making his ruling, Cooper concluded that "the authority exercised by [DOGE] across the federal government and the dramatic cuts it has apparently made with no congressional input appear to be unprecedented".[108][110] Cooper found that DOGE "obtained unprecedented access to sensitive personal and classified data and payment systems across federal agencies" and "appears to have the power not just to evaluate federal programs, but to drastically reshape and even eliminate them wholesale".[107][110]

American Oversight v. U.S. Department of Government Efficiency (D.D.C.), 1:25-cv-00409[111]
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington v. U.S. DOGE Service (D.D.C.), 1:25-cv-00511[112]
Democracy Forward Foundation v. U.S. Department of the Treasury (D.D.C.), 1:25-cv-00684[113]
Democracy Forward Foundation v. U.S. Marshals Service (D.D.C.), 1:25-cv-00749[114]
Project on Government Oversight, Inc. v. Trump (D.D.C.), 1:25-cv-00527[115]

{snip}

[112] "Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington v. U.S. DOGE Service, 1:25-cv-00511". CourtListener. Retrieved April 4, 2025.

{snip}

Recommendations

3 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Will they do it?................. Lovie777 May 14 #1
That is the question BoRaGard May 14 #6
Defying court orders is first and foremost in their playbook SheltieLover May 14 #10
They are ignoring DENVERPOPS May 14 #22
Roberts is spineless. SheltieLover May 14 #23
Not only that DENVERPOPS May 14 #24
But they can deputize marshalls to enforce orders SheltieLover May 14 #25
I can only imagine DENVERPOPS May 14 #26
No doubt, but the court can deputize anyone they want, as far as I understand the process. SheltieLover May 14 #27
Am I the only one who has no idea what CREW means? FakeNoose May 14 #2
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) NT mahatmakanejeeves May 14 #3
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (D.C.) HariSeldon May 14 #4
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington EarthFirst May 14 #5
Nope. Thanks for asking the question. Biophilic May 14 #7
You were not the only one, and I'm glad you asked. ShazzieB May 14 #17
No you weren't! N/t Hope22 May 14 #19
Statement from CREW on Blue: littlemissmartypants May 14 #8
Thx, Pants! SheltieLover May 14 #11
My pleasure, SL! ❤️ littlemissmartypants May 14 #12
Additional information: mahatmakanejeeves May 14 #9
Unfortunately, there is no agency which I can think of willing to enforce any kind of judgments or other court railings. Magoo48 May 14 #13
Yep. To rail, markodochartaigh May 14 #14
Big Balls ain't so big now. rubbersole May 14 #15
Why do I feel like even if they do have records... dchill May 14 #16
Good ruling. ShazzieB May 14 #18
It will be appealed. To comply with the law is the LAST thing doge will do. Fil1957 May 14 #20
Betting they did not keep "records". Evolve Dammit May 14 #21
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»BREAKING: DC Circuit hold...»Reply #9