A government ethics watchdog group is pushing for a federal judge to order the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to produce records related to its operations, arguing that such information is crucial for Congress and the public before the current government funding deadline. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) filed a lawsuit against DOGE, accusing the agency of unlawfully refusing to comply with Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests for records about its activities and ignoring demands for DOGE to preserve its records under the Federal Records Act.
CREW’s requests focused on obtaining expedited records concerning communications between the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and individuals associated with DOGE prior to the Trump administration’s inauguration. The group also sought documents regarding changes to the U.S. Digital Service, organizational charts, financial disclosures, and DOGE’s communications with other federal agencies. However, DOGE has so far failed to turn over these records.
In response to the lawsuit, the Trump administration argued that DOGE was not subject to FOIA laws because it was designated as a “free-standing component of the Executive Office of the President.” FOIA typically applies to agencies and departments in the executive branch unless their functions are limited to advising and assisting the President. The Trump administration’s stance is that DOGE’s operations fall under this exemption.
During a court hearing, attorneys representing CREW contended that the public and members of Congress would face significant harm if the agency did not release the requested documents before the government’s funding vote. CREW’s attorney argued that members of Congress lacked adequate information about DOGE’s organizational structure, funding, and authority, making it difficult for them to make an informed decision when it comes time to vote on the continuing resolution, set to expire in mid-March.
The watchdog emphasized the urgency of the situation, noting that DOGE’s influence over government actions is unprecedented. According to CREW’s attorney, DOGE has been directing other agencies on a massive scale, including canceling contracts worth hundreds of billions of dollars and overseeing the firing of thousands of federal employees. The agency’s role, CREW argued, is far more expansive than merely advising the President.
The debate also touched on the involvement of Elon Musk in DOGE. The Trump administration had previously submitted declarations stating that Musk was not leading DOGE, but CREW pointed to numerous public statements from the President suggesting that the tech billionaire was, in fact, calling the shots within the agency. This discrepancy has raised questions about the true nature of DOGE’s leadership and its operations.
U.S. District Judge Christopher R. Cooper, who presided over the hearing, posed a hypothetical scenario to the government attorneys regarding how a legislator’s vote might be affected if they discovered that Musk had plans to significantly reduce or eliminate funding for a particular agency without their knowledge. The government’s attorneys maintained that DOGE’s function was purely advisory, and they argued that CREW would not suffer irreparable harm because the connection between the agency’s operations and the upcoming appropriations vote was too indirect.
Despite these arguments, CREW’s attorneys insisted that without access to the requested documents, it would be impossible for Congress to fully understand the scope of DOGE’s power and influence, undermining the transparency necessary for proper decision-making. Judge Cooper indicated that he would issue a ruling on the matter in the near future, emphasizing the urgency of resolving the dispute quickly given the impending funding deadline.
