Keith Ellison: Fighting DOGE in the Courts | WatchCats #5
Mar 11, 2025
auto_awesome
In this discussion, Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison shares insights into the ongoing litigation against the new administration's controversial executive orders. Ellison, a former U.S. Congressman, sheds light on lawsuits challenging DOGE's access to Treasury systems and the delegation of unprecedented power to Elon Musk. He highlights the essential role of state attorneys general in defending democracy and the complexities of federal civil procedures. The conversation also delves into the implications for consumer protection and calls for greater congressional accountability.
Keith Ellison emphasizes that lawsuits by state attorneys general are crucial in challenging the overreach of federal actions, particularly concerning government data access.
The new executive order imposing financial bonds on plaintiffs seeking temporary restraining orders seeks to deter meritless litigation while complicating the process for legitimate cases.
Ellison warns that the administration's possible non-compliance with court orders and lack of transparency could threaten democratic values and citizen engagement.
Deep dives
Understanding the Executive Order on Restraining Orders
The executive order stipulates that individuals seeking a temporary restraining order (TRO) against the government must post a bond equivalent to the potential harm assessed by a judge. This is intended to deter activist groups from filing what the administration terms meritless lawsuits for fundraising and political gain, as it places a financial burden on plaintiffs should their cases fail. Historically, federal judges often waive this bond requirement, allowing for easier access to judicial remedies. However, the new directive appears to push agencies to justify higher bond amounts, potentially dissuading litigation against the administration.
Attorney General Ellison's Legal Challenges
Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison discusses his involvement in lawsuits aimed at challenging actions taken by the Trump administration, specifically those affecting the Department of Government Efficiency. These lawsuits have targeted unauthorized access to sensitive government data, emphasizing the importance of adhering to the Administrative Procedures Act, which mandates fair notice and the avoidance of arbitrary actions. The success of these lawsuits illustrates the potential for state attorneys general to actively counter federal directives that they view as overstepping legal boundaries. Ellison highlights a recent court-ordered temporary restraining order that blocks unauthorized access to the Treasury payment system.
Concerns Over Federal Compliance and Future Hearings
Ellison raises concerns about the compliance of the Trump administration with court orders, indicating issues surrounding frozen federal funds meant for disaster relief, which have adversely affected communities in need. A preliminary injunction has been granted, but the ongoing hearings will determine the federal government’s adherence to the court's directives. The potential for non-compliance could escalate to significant legal consequences, including contempt of court. This situation underscores the challenges facing states when engaging with a federal administration that may prioritize its agenda over legal obligations.
The Issue of Unauthorized Executive Actions
A significant legal challenge revolves around the appointments clause of the Constitution, in which Ellison contends that the administration is violating the established procedures for appointments. The contention arises from claims that Elon Musk, who exerts considerable influence over federal agencies, is acting outside the bounds of appointee status without proper Senate confirmation. Ellison argues that Musk's authoritative role blurs lines between advisory positions and official appointments, potentially undermining the Constitution’s checks and balances. These legal arguments highlight concerns about the executive branch's reach and the need for accountability in governmental operations.
Navigating Authoritarianism and Public Engagement
Ellison warns of the potential for a shift toward authoritarianism, characterized by a lack of transparency and diminished access to reliable information. He emphasizes the importance of open discourse and collective engagement from the public to defend democratic values. The chilling effect on dissenters, fueled by targeted social media campaigns, is cited as a significant concern for the health of political discourse. Ellison advocates for citizens to demand transparency and accountability from their representatives, indicating that the preservation of democracy depends on active civic participation.
The new Trump administration’s “slash first, ask questions later” approach to overhauling the federal bureaucracy has, unsurprisingly, spawned a mountain of litigation raising a dizzying array of statutory and constitutional challenges to various executive actions.
Among the most effective to date at halting the steamroller, at least temporarily, have been those brought by a coalition of Democratic state attorneys general. Two of these have focused particularly on the activities of the soi-disant Department of Government Efficiency. The first lawsuit has, thus far successfully, sought to block DOGE staff from accessing the Treasury Department’s critical payments system, alleging violations of the Administrative Procedures Act, the Privacy Act of 1974, and the Federal Information Security Management Act, among others.
The second suit strikes at the formation of DOGE itself, arguing that the unprecedented power delegated to Elon Musk effectively makes him a senior government officer, and that the administration’s failure to seek Senate confirmation runs afoul of the constitutional mandate to obtain the “advice and consent” of that body for such appointments.
In order to get the inside skinny on the litigation—and what future challenges might be coming down the pike—we spoke with Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, who brought the suits along with 18 other state attorneys general. Ellison previously served a dozen years in the U.S. House of Representatives, where he founded the Congressional Antitrust Caucus and the Congressional Consumer Justice Caucus, as well as co-chairing the Congressional Progressive Caucus.
~~~
Want to support the podcast, get early episodes, and jump into our community Discord? Join our Substack!
