The actions of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), informally headed by Elon Musk, are the subject of ongoing lawsuits. Legal experts have described many of DOGE's actions as illegal, breaking multiple privacy, security, and congressional laws and regulations. It has been described as taking a "move fast and break things" approach. Legal analysts have alleged breaches of law regarding aspects of the Privacy Act, Internal Revenue Code, and Federal Information Security Modernization Act. Forcing workers out of their offices and claims of "deleting" agencies and seizure of funds authorized by Congress have been described as breaking Article 1 of the United States Constitution and constituting a potential "constitutional crisis".

Legal proceedings have been complicated by difficulties in establishing basic facts, such as Musk's role, the identities and formal powers of his associates, and the unclear relationship among Musk, DOGE, and political appointees backed by Musk. There have also been questions about how many of Musk's associates have been detailed to specific agencies, whether they act as employees of those agencies or of the White House, and what formal powers they have to demand access to agency computer systems.

On February5, Republican members of the United States House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform blocked an effort by committee Democrats to subpoena Musk. The White House and the Republican Party have defended DOGE, Musk, Trump, and other plaintiffs, stating they are in full compliance with federal law. Musk will be deposed to answer for what he and DOGE did with USAID.

Disclosure of personal and financial records

Multiple lawsuits accuse DOGE and Musk of having broken the Privacy Act of 1974. DOGE has given conflicting testimonies on the data it has accessed, the identity of the DOGE members who have accessed it, and the reasons why they did.

Access to government computer systems

On February 5, several labors unions—the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO), the American Federation of Government Employees, the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, the Service Employees International Union, and Communication Workers of America—along with the Economic Policy Institute filed a lawsuit to prevent DOGE from accessing computer systems at the Department of Labor (DOL), subsequently amending the suit to also include systems at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). They asked for a temporary restraining order, which was denied on February 7. On February 27, the judge, John Bates, ordered the Trump administration to make four witnesses available for depositions, one each from DOGE and the three federal departments.

On February 4, three federal employee unionsthe Alliance for Retired Americans, the AFGE, and the Service Employees International Union (SEIU)filed a lawsuit against the Treasury Department, alleging that Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent unlawfully granted DOGE access to sensitive data. The White House defended Musk's role, stating he had followed all federal laws. On February6, Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly agreed to a proposal filed by the Justice Department to temporarily limit DOGE to "read-only" access of Treasury data until a hearing for a preliminary injunction could be held on February24. Department of Justice lawyers struggled to explain how DOGE plans to use sensitive taxpayer data. In the hearing, Kollar-Kotelly said that she had "concerns about the constitutionality of U.S.D.S.'s structure and operations". She also questioned the government's lawyer about who the DOGE administrator is and what Musk's specific role is in DOGE, but the lawyer said that he didn't know.

On February7, the University of California Student Association filed a lawsuit against acting secretary of education Denise Carter and the Department of Education (ED) in the District of Columbia, claiming an "enormous and unprecedented" "intrusion into individuals' privacy". The case has been assigned to Judge Randolph D. Moss.

On February7, the ACLU filed Freedom of Information Act requests with over 40 federal agencies "for any records that reveal whether DOGE or its representatives have sought or obtained access to databases containing personally identifiable information, financial records, healthcare data, or other sensitive government-held records of Americans".

On February11, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) filed its own lawsuit to prevent DOGE from accessing the Office of Personnel Management's data.

Alliance for Retired Americans v. Bessent (D.D.C.), 1:25-cv-00313 American Civil Liberties Union v. Social Security Administration (D.D.C.), 1:25-cv-01217 American Federation of Government Employees v. Office of Personnel Management (S.D.N.Y), 1:25-cv-01237 American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations v. Department of Labor (D.D.C.), 1:25-cv-00339 American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO v. Social Security Administration (D. Md.) 1:25-cv-00596, appealed to the 4th Cir., 25-1411, appealed to the Supreme Court, Social Security Administration v. American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, 24A1063 American Federation of Teachers v. Bessent (D. Md.), 8:25-cv-00430, appealed to the Fourth Circuit, 25-1282 Center for Taxpayer Rights v. Internal Revenue Service (D.D.C), 1:25-cv-00457 Electronic Privacy Information Center v. U.S. Office of Personnel Management (E.D.V.A.) 1:25-cv-00255 Morris v. Trump (D. Md.), 1:25-cv-00435 National Treasury Employees Union v. Vought (D.D.C.), 1:25-cv-00380 Nemeth-Greenleaf v. U.S. Office of Personnel Management (D.D.C.), 1:25-cv-00407 State of New York v. Donald J. Trump (S.D.N.Y.), 1:25-cv-01144, appealed to the 2nd Cir., 25-1860 University of California Student Association v. Carter (D.D.C.), 1:25-cv-00354 (plaintiffs dismissed the action)

Compensation for access to data On February12, a class action suit was filed against Musk, Office of Personnel Management, Department of the Treasury and Secretary of Treasury Scott Bessent. Gribbon v. Musk claims that taxpayers, federal employees and those receiving benefits should be compensated for DOGE's access to their personal and financial data. It has been assigned to judge Christopher R. Cooper.

Gribbon v. Musk (D.D.C.), 1:25-cv-00422 (voluntary dismissal)

Federal deferred resignation program ("Fork in the Road" memo) A lawsuit, filed on January 27 in the District Court for the District of Columbia by two federal employees against the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), alleges that it failed to conduct a federally mandated assessment to evaluate and mitigate privacy risks associated with the alleged new email system's data collection on federal employees. On February 3, four unions representing 800,000 federal employees filed suit against the Treasury Department, arguing that OPM violated the Administrative Procedure Act by failing to provide a legal basis for the buyout offer. On February 6, Judge George O'Toole Jr. temporarily blocked Trump and DOGE from engaging in any further action related to the buyout until further arguments were heard. On February 12, Judge O'Toole ruled that the plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge the buyout offer because they were not directly affected.

Jane Does 1-2 v. Office of Personnel Management (D.D.C.), 1:25-cv-00234 American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO v. Ezell (D. Mass), 1:25-cv-10276

Dismantling of agencies

AmeriCorps

State of Maryland v. Corporation for National and Community Service (D. Md.), 1:25-cv-01363 Elev8 Baltimore, Inc. v. Corporation for National and Community Service (D. Md.), 1:25-cv-01458 Erie County New York v. Corporation for National and Community Service (D.D.C.), 1:25-cv-00783 (voluntary dismissal)

National Endowment for the Humanities

American Council of Learned Societies v. McDonald (S.D.N.Y.), 1:25-cv-03657 The Authors Guild v. National Endowment for the Humanities (S.D.N.Y.), 1:25-cv-03923 (case consolidated with American Council of Learned Societies v. McDonald) When DOGE cancelled 1,400 previously approved grants by the National Endowment for the Humanities, the Authors Guild and the American Council of Learned Societies sued in the Southern District of New York. The lawsuit revealed that DOGE employees Nate Cavanaugh and Justin Fox used ChatGPT to decide which grants should be cut because of their association with diversion, equity and inclusion. Judge Colleen McMahon ruled Fox and Cavanaugh's efforts to be violations of the First and Fifth amendments, describing them as “a textbook example of unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination” and ordered the restoration of the grants.

U.S. African Development Foundation

Brehm v. Marocco (D.D.C.), 1:25-cv-00660

US Agency for International Development (USAID) firings and shutdown On February6, a lawsuit seeking to halt the shutdown of USAID was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia by the American Foreign Service Association and the AFGE. The judge, Carl J. Nichols, issued a temporary restraining order on February7 against imminent plans for 2,200 employees to be placed on administrative leave and for overseas USAID workers to return to the US. After a hearing, Judge Nichols extended the freeze through February21.

Nichols held a telephone hearing on February19. After Trump-appointed USAID leader Peter Marocco initially told the court that overseas USAID employees would be given a choice as to whether remain abroad while on administrative leave, but days later told the court otherwise, Nichols called the government's contradictions "a mess" and ordered the DOJ to clarify its stance by February20.

American Federation of Government Employees v. Trump (D.D.C.), 1:25-cv-00352 AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition v. U.S. Department of State (D.D.C.), 1:25-cv-00400, appealed to the D.C. Cir., 25-5046 and 25-5098, appealed to the Supreme Court, Department of State v. AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition, 24A831 Global Health Council v. Trump (D.D.C.), 1:25-cv-00402 Personal Services Contractor Association v. Trump (D.D.C.), 1:25-cv-00469

Dismantling of independent organizations

US Institute of Peace

Pippenger v. U.S. DOGE Service (D.D.C.), 1:25-cv-01090 U.S. Institute of Peace v. Jackson (D.D.C.), 1:25-cv-00804

Establishment of DOGE

With the signing of Executive Order 14158, Trump renamed the U.S. Digital Service (USDS) the U.S. DOGE Service (also USDS), and established the U.S. DOGE Service Temporary Organization, both under the authority of an administrator. Trump referred to Elon Musk as being in charge of DOGE. Amy Gleason was later identified as the acting administrator.

Appointments clause lawsuits

A lawsuit by 26 USAID employees and contractors claims Elon Musk’s role as DOGE head violates the Appointments Clause, alleging he wields significant government authority without Senate confirmation.