Supreme Court Will Review Dispute Over Records From Elon Musk’s DOGE
New York Times · LC · trust 51/100
A nonprofit watchdog group sued the Department of Government Efficiency, asserting that it should be subject to federal Freedom of Information Act discovery requests.
Listen · 4:18 min Share full article Members of the Department of Government Efficiency visited the U.S. African Development Foundation in March 2025. Credit... Maansi Srivastava for The New York Times By Ann E. Marimow
In the early days of President Trump’s second term, Mr. Musk’s initiative, known as DOGE, swept through federal agencies seeking to overhaul the government bureaucracy and fire scores of workers. Mr. Musk eventually departed last year amid declining influence and friction with the president and after failing to deliver on promised cuts to the budget.
But a nonprofit watchdog group, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, has continued to press for information about the entity’s operations. The group, known as CREW, had filed an expedited request for records under the Freedom of Information Act. After it did not receive the records, the group filed a lawsuit, saying DOGE had violated public records laws.
The justices are expected to schedule the matter for oral arguments early next year and to issue a decision in the case before their new term ends in late June or early July. It is one of several cases before the Supreme Court testing the Trump administration’s policies.
At issue in the case will be whether the quasi-private entity is similar to other federal agencies, which are generally subject to federal public records laws. The administration has argued it is instead more like presidential advisory groups, which are able to keep more information private.
A federal judge in Washington, Christopher R. Cooper, concluded last year that Mr. Musk’s group was likely subject to the records law and ordered it to turn over the documents during the lawsuit discovery process. A three-judge panel on a federal appeals court agreed .
We are having trouble retrieving the article content.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.
Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.
Thank you for your patience while we verify access.
Read the original at New York Times →
Open in TruthVane →