Elon Musk's DOGE immediately sued for allegedly violating federal transparency rules

The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), Elon Musk's project to dismantle federal programs and regulations to his liking, has been hit with a lawsuit alleging that it violates federal transparency rules just moments after President Donald Trump was sworn into office.

The 30-page complaint, obtained by The Washington Post, alleges that DOGE — envisioned as a non-governmental organization that can carry out an austerity agenda through the advice it provides to the White House — is breaking a 1972 law that requires advisory committees to abide by rules concerning disclosure, hiring and other practices. According to the lawsuit, DOGE qualifies as a “federal advisory committee" (FACAs), a class of legal entity required by the Federal Advisory Committee Act to have "fairly balanced" representation, keep meeting records, file a charter with Congress and more to ensure that its advice is transparent, ethical and free of prejudice.

The lawsuit demands that DOGE abide by FACA requirements, arguing that its reports do bit presently "reflect the views of a lawfully constituted advisory committee" and should not be implemented by the White House.

DOGE, which has already hired dozens of staffers and deployed emissaries across U.S. agencies to compile reports on what to cut, does not appear to have followed any of those requirements. And it's still unclear how it will be funded, though Trump's advisors have floated ideas such as soliciting private donations from the president's chief money men or asking Congress for $30 to $50 million in earmarks.

“DOGE is not exempted from FACA’s requirements,” states the lawsuit, written by Kel McClanahan, executive director of National Security Counselors. “All meetings of DOGE, including those conducted through an electronic medium, must be open to the public.”

The lawsuit also maintains that DOGE is violating the balanced representation rule by not hiring anyone to represent federal workers. Two of the plaintiffs had applied to DOGE for the stated purpose of speaking on their behalf, but were ignored.

National Security Counselors can expect a fight in court. DOGE also has some historical precedent on its side.

Courts have at times shielded entities from having to obey FACA guidelines, citing practical and routine needs from the White House, as the Supreme Court did in 1987 when it ruled that the American Bar Association was exempt even though the president consulted them for judicial nominations. In 2002, however, the court applied FACA rules on advisory panels on nuclear waste and cleanup, among others.