Elon Musk is preparing for one of the most important undertakings of his life.
But Musk is facing legal jeopardy.
And the Supreme Court will be forced to decide Elon Musk’s fate in this major case.
DOGE will end up before the Supreme Court
Donald Trump named Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy the co-chairs of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).
Musk and Ramaswamy have the job of identifying hundreds of billions of dollars in wasteful spending.
Already the pair found over $500 million in what Ramaswamy called “low hanging fruit” that Congress can cut right away.
CNN’s Jim Acosta asked California Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) about the prospect of Americans seeing the spending cuts Ramaswamy and Musk propose go into law.
“I want to ask you about something that is coming into your wheelhouse. Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy apparently will be up on Capitol Hill talking about their ideas for this thing that they’re calling DOGE, the Department of Government Efficiency, which is a bit of a misnomer because it won’t be a part of the federal government, apparently but Congress controls the purse strings. What are your thoughts on Elon Musk and Ramaswamy deciding or trying to decide what stays and what goes in the federal government?” Musk asked.
Lofgren claimed DOGE was unconstitutional and that Democrats would file lawsuits if Donald Trump tried to unilaterally impose DOGE’s spending cuts.
“Well, it’s illegal. You know they haven’t asked to meet with me, but the impoundment of funds that have been appropriated by the Congress is unconstitutional and illegal. There is no such Department of Government Efficiency it’s made up,” Lofgren began.
“So good luck to them. I mean, if, um, if there is a plan that President Trump wants to propose to the Congress he should send it to us but the Constitution does not permit the president to simply avoid what the Congress has done, that that power of the purse is with the legislative branch, not the president,” Lofgren added.
DOGE isn’t actually an official government department.
It has no authority to unilaterally impose spending cuts.
But that doesn’t mean the cuts Musk and Ramaswamy recommend won’t go into effect.
Historically, Presidents had the authority to impound funds.
If a program didn’t require all the funding necessary to achieve its goals that Congress appropriated, then the President had the right not to spend the money.
Likewise, if Congress appropriated foreign aid to a country that turned into an enemy, the President had the right to freeze those funds.
That changed with the unconstitutional 1974 Impoundment Control Act.
When Democrats impeached Donald Trump in the Ukraine hoax, they argued he violated the Impoundment Control Act by freezing aid to Ukraine.
But the Impoundment Control Act is unconstitutional.
The act allows Congress to appoint a comptroller to run the Government Accountability Office.
The comptroller’s job is to sue if the President isn’t spending money in accordance with the laws Congress passes.
But the comptroller is a creation of the legislative branch yet functions with executive power, meaning the head of the executive branch loses its Article II authority.
Donald Trump and his new administration plan to test the Impoundment Control Act in court.
And the Supreme Court could end up deciding the fate of the spending cut recommendations that come out of DOGE if President Trump tries to impound the funds.
