Speed
The irony here is that Musk is moving so fast it's harder for bureaucratic supporters to keep up.
Lawfare Leaves Little Time for Evidence
Things are moving so quickly that the litigation against the Administration is sloppy.
‘Lawsuits filed to stop President Donald Trump’s effort to cut government waste are bound to have trouble navigating around the fact that our Constitution invests the president with all of the executive authority in the federal government. There’s another problem with the instant litigation that seems to pop up whenever Trump adviser Elon Musk takes a look at a Beltway agency. Media warnings of theoretical harm are not evidence that laws have been broken.
‘Last week this column noted the sloppy work in a hastily drafted partisan lawsuit by state attorneys general over the Trump effort to examine Treasury payments. Now a different lawsuit from Democratic officials in various states has inspired an Obama appointee on the federal bench to observe that there’s no there there.’
Elon Musk staffer created a DOGE AI assistant for making government ‘less dumb’
There’s a fine-tuned Grok model for team DOGE. Are they using it?
‘A senior Elon Musk staffer has created a custom AI chatbot that purports to help the Department of Government Efficiency eliminate government waste and is powered by Musk’s artificial intelligence company xAI, TechCrunch has learned.
The chatbot, which was publicly accessible until Tuesday, was hosted on a DOGE-named subdomain on the website of Christopher Stanley, who works as the head of security engineering at SpaceX, as well as at the White House. Soon after publication, the chatbot appeared to drop offline.’
These were super-controversial at introduction. Inertia, dude.
‘FTC Chairman Andrew N. Ferguson announces that the FTC and DOJ’s Joint 2023 Merger Guidelines are in effect:’
Who Controls the Bureaucracy? The Supreme Court’s Next Landmark Executive Power Case
Is any agency independent? We’re about to find out.
‘On February 7, 2025, the Trump administration removed Hampton Dellinger from his position as Special Counsel of the U.S. Office of Special Counsel (“OSC”). This dismissal was made without citing any of the three required statutory justifications for removal—(1) inefficiency, (2) neglect of duty, or (3) malfeasance in office—prompting an immediate legal challenge by Dellinger. In response, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia issued a temporary restraining order (“TRO”) reinstating Dellinger. Relying on the Supreme Court’s New Deal-era decision in Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, 295 U.S. 602 (1935), the district court determined that Dellinger is likely to succeed in demonstrating that the OSC’s statutory removal protections impose a lawful constraint on presidential power.
‘Since the district court’s ruling, two significant developments have occurred. First, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit declined to hear the administration’s appeal of the TRO. Second, the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) has filed an emergency application with the U.S. Supreme Court seeking to vacate the TRO and to obtain an immediate administrative stay. The DOJ’s filing asserts that the President’s removal of Dellinger is an unambiguous exercise of Article II authority and that the district court’s reinstatement of Dellinger represents an unprecedented intrusion into executive power.
‘The case raises fundamental constitutional and strategic questions about the scope of executive authority over so-called “independent agencies,” which, if the administration prevails, may exist more in name than in function. Beyond the constitutional questions, the case also holds strategic oversight importance to the Trump administration. The OSC plays a key role in acting upon information provided by civil service whistleblowers who identify instances of waste, mismanagement, and abuse within government agencies and in enforcing the Hatch Act, which restricts political activities of government employees. Given the Trump administration’s public commitment to reshaping the federal workforce and addressing perceived internal bureaucratic resistance to its policy directives, control over the OSC is likely viewed within the administration as a necessary tool in its management of the sprawling federal bureaucracy.’
Poof! The Independent Agencies Are No Longer Independent
Sunstein, a former director of OIRA, gives an overview of the “independent” agencies.
‘The United States has long had “independent” agencies - agencies that operate free from the policy control of the president. Here are some examples: the FCC, the FTC, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the Federal Reserve Board, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the SEC, and the NLRB.
‘Sure, the heads of those agencies are appointed by the president. But the general understanding has long been that they are special, in the sense that they are “independent” of the Commander-in-Chief.
‘In practice, the independence of the independent agencies has meant two things. First, the president cannot fire their heads except for cause, which frequently is defined, by statute, as malfeasance, neglect of duty, or inefficiency (with all of these narrowly defined).
‘Second, the White House, and in particular the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), cannot oversee or influence or direct their decisions, which means in turn that they issue regulations free from WH or OIRA control.’
Musk calls himself ‘tech-support’ for Trump, blasts U.S. bureaucracy for blocking executive orders
The DC two-step (waiting until the elected officials get thrown out in the next election instead of following their instructions) is getting more difficult to perform.
‘In a Fox News interview aired Tuesday, Musk criticized the slow implementation of Trump’s directives and asserted that his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) is working to ensure the orders are enforced. “The president makes these executive orders, which are very sensible and good for the country, but then they don’t get implemented,” he said, alleging that bureaucratic resistance undermines democratic governance.’
Modest Thaw in Regulatory Freeze
It’s early days, but people are monitoring bureaucratic rule-making.
‘On the Congressional Review Act (CRA) front, be sure to follow the American Action Forum’s (AAF) updated CRA tracker. As of today, members of the 119th Congress have introduced CRA resolutions of disapproval addressing 29 Biden-era rules that collectively involve $136.7 billion in compliance costs. AAF will continue to update this tracker as additional resolutions are introduced and receive votes on the floors of each chamber.
‘Since January 1, the federal government has published $186.2 billion in total net costs (with $6.1 billion in new costs from finalized rules) and 25 million hours of net annual paperwork cuts (with 1.7 million hours in increases from final rules).’
Regulatory clarity for crypto is near.
‘Recent regulatory developments in the crypto asset and financial technology space suggest that US regulators may be shifting toward a more balanced approach — one that prioritizes clearer regulations while fostering innovation over a more enforcement-driven strategy. President Trump’s recent executive order on this topic reshapes the Biden administration’s approach to crypto assets by eliminating many of the prior administration’s policies on crypto and establishing the President’s Working Group on Digital Asset Markets (Working Group). Acting US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Chairman Mark Uyeda has relaunched the SEC's Crypto Task Force, appointing Commissioner Hester Peirce to lead its efforts and set its objectives. The SEC has also moved to roll back problematic accounting guidance and pause certain enforcement actions against major crypto companies. Other key regulators, including the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), have yet to take similar steps. However, the president recently nominated Brian Quintenz to lead the CFTC, and Jonathan Gould to head the OCC, both of whom have substantial crypto experience. Taken together, these developments may signal a long-awaited shift toward regulatory clarity for crypto that balances innovation and investor protection.
‘If these developments are received favorably by the industry, we anticipate more investment and new entrants in the crypto asset space. In particular, we can expect additional research & development and new innovations by both start-ups and existing enterprises. Past cycles have brought a race to develop valuable technology and stake out intellectual property rights to capture the value represented by those innovations.
4 ways the Trump administration can drive commonsense regulatory reform
Congressional oversight of administrative activity is a key step to taming the leviathan.
‘The REINS Act ensures that Congress always maintains the final say over significant regulatory action. Any agency guidance with an economic impact of $100 million or more would require Congress’ explicit sign-off.’
DOGE Is What Happens When Trust In Government Hits Zero
DOGE is bootstrapping its own credibility with every dollar of waste, fraud, and abuse it uncovers. It didn’t have to be this way.
‘To say that DOGE is moving fast and breaking things would be an understatement. But in reality, what alternative approach would have been better at this point? The country’s taxation, spending, and fiscal habits are so poorly calibrated that promising minor cuts here and there would accomplish nothing. Letting loose a bull in the China shop of the American government, however, quickly postures up and puts everyone on notice: The gravy train has officially ended, and nothing is off-limits.
‘Would there be more nuanced and strategic ways to handle the problem? Probably. But that’s not what we deserve at this point. Sadly, in some ways we deserve a bit of mayhem while reviewing how the country is managing its finances. And my answer to “what are your thoughts about DOGE” is irrelevant, because all I can do is sit back and watch it unfold.
‘When it comes to public sentiment, I think the gross misuses of taxpayer money that DOGE has—and likely will continue to—uncover will leave the average American so aghast that concerns about how “strategic” DOGE is in its approach could eventually play second fiddle.’
Federal workers decry recent firings in Presidents’ Day protest
For all the sturm und drang about Musk and company obtaining access to federal systems, the corollary implication is that all kinds of people had access to those systems.
Who are they and how are they trustworthy?
Are they the same people who leaked Trump’s task returns? Or who sent Hegseth an audit request in December?
‘Thousands of people surrounded the reflecting pool in front of the U.S. Capitol building on Presidents’ Day to protest the Trump administration’s terminations of recently hired federal employees and billionaire ally Elon Musk’s inroads into troves of sensitive federal systems through his Department of Government Efficiency.
‘Many participants who were at Monday’s gatherings are current or freshly dismissed federal workers who joined from the surrounding D.C. area, concerned that recent moves from the White House — including the decision to mass fire thousands of employees over the past week and offer a deferred resignation package to feds in moves to reduce purported taxpayer spending “waste” — are unfair, illegal and create risks for Americans and allies nationwide.’
Longtime GSA employee quits rather than give Musk ally access to Notify.gov
All of a sudden everyone is Spartacus.
‘A government engineer at the General Services Administration quit Tuesday after being asked to give a political appointee associated with Elon Musk administrative access to the agency’s texting platform called Notify.gov, which helps government agencies send text reminders about benefit programs like Medicaid.
‘The head of GSA’s Technology Transformation Services — Thomas Shedd, a longtime Tesla alum — has been requesting administrative access to all components of the system without a clear reason for needing that access, according to an internal message from the GSA engineer viewed by Nextgov/FCW. The news was first reported by 404 Media.
‘Shedd “would be able to view all personally identifiable information (PII) moving through the Notify system, including phone numbers and variable data for members of the public,” the employee — who appears to have worked at the agency for the past decade — wrote.’
Musk’s DOGE Cuts Risk Triggering a Government Shutdown
Will the Democrats lock the government out in protest over DOGE?
‘But Musk’s actions could soon pose a problem for Trump and the Republican Party. On March 14, the continuing resolution that funds the government will run out and its work will shut down—unless the Republican Congress and Trump reach an agreement.’
At this rate, DOGE will undo years of penetration by the progressive movement into the civil service. Can it restore balance?
‘Still, one ought not to let the perfect be the enemy of the good. The unresponsiveness of the bureaucracy is one of the biggest threats to our constitutional order. As a result of congressional abdication, presidential ambition, and the progressive movement’s long march through the institutions, conservative presidents are routinely saddled with a civil service that, with the encouragement of the press and much of the legal academy, has come to regard itself as an independent check on the White House. DOGE cannot solve this problem alone, but, providing that it works within the limits of its legitimate power, it can make itself extremely useful to those who desire reform. By ensuring that federal agencies are staying within their legal bounds, by shining a light on spending and policymaking that would never have got through Congress or been consented to by the voters, and by removing rogue staff whose intention is to make trouble for their elected boss, DOGE can strike a blow against the extra-constitutional “fourth branch” that President Trump has so often promised to curtail. Godspeed.’
Judge Declines to Block DOGE, but Warning Signs Loom over Elon Musk’s Role
McCarthy on the Chutkan denial of a restraining order on DOGE. Interesting questions are still open as to the nature of Musk’s role. Is he making recommendations or is he acting?
‘Putting aside whether they are likely to succeed on the merits of their claims that DOGE is an illegal construct, the blue states seeking a TRO bore a burden they could not satisfy: a showing of irreparable harm — as Chutkan described it, demonstration of an injury “both certain and great, actual and not theoretical, beyond remediation, and of such imminence that there is a clear and present need for equitable relief” (emphasis in original).
‘The blue states could not clear this hurdle because all of their claims were speculative. Essentially, the attorneys general were surmising that if Musk and DOGE got access to agency data, a parade of horribles would likely ensue. However colorable such supposition may be, it is not sufficient to show that there would even be harm, much less harm incapable of being addressed by the normal court process rather than by a prior restraint on the government.’
Finally Regulating the Regulators
The conservative case for reigning in the independent agencies.
‘One crucial change that’s needed, and could be undertaken without new legislation, is to bring the so-called “independent” regulatory agencies more clearly under the control of the executive branch, so that they might be made more answerable to our constitutional system.
‘From the National Labor Relations Board and the Consumer Product Safety Commission to the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Federal Communications Commission, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and the rest of the dozen or so commissions that regulate the national economy, these agencies are generally considered independent because there is a limit on the president’s ability to remove their leaders. But as a practical matter, they are also generally independent of the review and coordination process by which the president and his senior appointees oversee the regulatory function of the executive branch. Even the Treasury Department, which is run by a secretary who obviously can be removed by the president, exercises this peculiar form of independence from review.
‘Bringing these agencies under the umbrella of presidential review and control would be a step toward bringing them more generally into the fold of the constitutional system, which has only three branches of government and no fourth super-branch of regulators.’