A lawsuit challenging the legitimacy of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has gained new momentum following President Donald Trump’s recent congressional address, where he made revealing comments about Elon Musk’s involvement in the organization.
During his speech to Congress on Tuesday evening, Trump acknowledged Musk’s presence in the gallery and described him as the head of DOGE, a newly established department aimed at reducing government waste. This statement has now become central to ongoing legal proceedings in the U.S. Court for the District of Columbia.
The National Security Counselors, representing the plaintiffs, have incorporated Trump’s remarks into their latest court filing, arguing they demonstrate an urgent need for expedited discovery to clarify DOGE’s exact nature and its relationship with the U.S. government.
This development comes despite last week’s White House announcement naming Amy Gleason as DOGE’s acting administrator. The Office of Administration has previously stated that Musk serves only as a senior presidential adviser without decision-making authority or formal employment within DOGE.
The lawsuit, filed in January, contends that DOGE is operating as an federal advisory committee in violation of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA). The plaintiffs argue that DOGE has failed to meet FACA’s requirements, which mandate balanced membership
representation, public meetings, detailed record-keeping, and proper charter filing.
A key concern raised in the lawsuit is DOGE’s alleged lack of transparency regarding its structure and membership. The plaintiffs particularly emphasize the absence of federal employee representation within DOGE, despite its mandate to make recommendations about federal employment practices and workforce reduction.
Two of the lawsuit’s co-plaintiffs, Jerald Lentini and Joshua Erlich, claim they submitted applications to join DOGE but received no response. Lentini, an attorney for National Security Counselors and elected official in Manchester, Connecticut, and Erlich, an employment lawyer, argue this demonstrates DOGE’s unwillingness to include perspectives from federal employees, unions, and accountability advocates.
The legal action seeks to halt DOGE’s operations until it complies with FACA requirements. Additionally, the plaintiffs want the court to declare DOGE improperly constituted and its recommendations invalid as products of an unlawful advisory committee.
The Trump administration has responded to transparency concerns by releasing federal contract receipts identified through DOGE’s cost-cutting efforts. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt addressed the matter on February 12, stating, “We have contracts upon contracts that we can send and provide this information to you. Let me be very clear, we are not trying to hide anything. We have been incredibly transparent, and we will continue to be.”
The president’s recent comments about Musk have added a new dimension to the legal challenge. During his speech, Trump praised the billionaire entrepreneur’s dedication, noting, “He didn’t need this,” and suggested that even Democratic lawmakers appreciated Musk’s efforts to reduce government spending, though they might be reluctant to admit it.
The White House has not yet responded to requests for comment on the latest developments in the lawsuit. As the legal proceedings continue, the case highlights ongoing questions about the proper structure and oversight of government advisory bodies and their compliance with federal regulations.