Trump Admin Argues DOGE Is Exempt From Records Requests in FOIA Lawsuit
Elon Musk promised "maximum transparency," but that apparently doesn't include Freedom of Information requests to DOGE.

In response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit, the Trump administration is arguing that its much-hyped Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) is exempt from public records requests.
Justice Department lawyers stated in a court filing Thursday that DOGE is no longer subject to FOIA requests after President Donald Trump issued an executive order in January moving DOGE, formerly U.S. Digital Services (USDS), out of the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB). OMB is subject to the public record law, unlike most of the offices and agencies within the Executive Office of the President.
"After January 20, 2025, USDS moved out of OMB and became a free-standing component of [the Executive Office of the President] that reports to the White House Chief of Staff," the government's motion stated in a footnote. "As a result, USDS is not subject to FOIA."
That filing was in response to a FOIA lawsuit filed last week by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), a government accountability group. CREW filed several sweeping public records requests for documents from OMB and DOGE, and it is suing to compel the production and release of its requests.
"The law is clear about how government records should be preserved so that, when the public requests them, they are easily and readily accessible. If the administration valued transparency, following records laws would be a priority," CREW President Noah Bookbinder said in a press release announcing CREW's FOIA lawsuit. "Instead, US DOGE Service and OMB are acting as though the law does not apply to them. It does."
The Trump administration's claim runs contrary to Trump and Elon Musk's promises and stated goals of delivering open, transparent government to the public.
"All aspects of the government must be fully transparent and accountable to the people," Musk posted on X earlier this month. "No exceptions, including, if not especially, the Federal Reserve."
At a White House press conference earlier this month, Musk said, "We are actually trying to be as transparent as possible, so all of our actions are maximally transparent. I don't know of a case where an organization has been more transparent than the DOGE organization."
And again, Musk declared last November: "There should be no need for FOIA requests. All government data should be default public for maximum transparency."
But DOGE has struggled to make its data public while also claiming exemption from FOIA, which is a recipe for maximum opacity, not transparency.
Between the shifting claims of how much taxpayer money DOGE was going to save, the release and quiet deletion of error-filled data, and now attempts to hide DOGE from public record laws—well, it doesn't inspire confidence.
The New York Times reported today on the genesis and behind-the-scenes implementation of DOGE's attempt to radically downsize the federal government. The story includes an anecdote on how Musk rejected the shabby West Wing office the Trump administration tried to set him up in, and instead moved into a gilded suite in the Eisenhower Executive Building.
"There, he installed a gaming computer with a giant, curved screen and blinking LED lights, and decorated his desk with a DOGE sign and a MAGA hat," the Times reported. "He also had a DOGE T-shirt emblazoned with a quote from one of his favorite movies, 'Office Space': 'What would you say you do here?'"
If Musk wants to be taken seriously, DOGE can start living up to his rhetoric on opening the books. If not, he can keep playing computer games inside his fancy office and ordering custom T-shirts for himself, while transparency advocates conclude that his interest in open government is, like his claims of being an elite gamer, so much bluster.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
The lawfare against Trump never ends.
Indeed.... +1000000000..
Poe's law strikes again.
That's only because you are an idiot, and more than a little demented when it comes to Orange Hitler.
He keeps you guys busy pretty well for an idiot.
Lol, true enough. Sarc is definitely a master baiter.
How is trying to enforce government transparency laws considered "lawfare"?
Its Poes lawfare today. Its the handle. Hes criticizing intransparency i think.
Which laws are being violated molly?
Think really hard...the Freedom of Information Act?
The guy is literally giving your data to a friend of his and a bunch of kids. They may, or more likely, may not, have any kind of security clearance at all. They have not been confirmed by the Senate, their backgrounds are unknown. They are firing thousands of government employees who work for organizations authorized and paid for under Article 1 of the U.S. Constitution. Elon et. al are dissolving entire offices set up and funded (again, as described by law in the U.S. Constitution) by Congress. The person leading and ultimately responsible for DOGE's actions is, apparently *not* Elon, but the White House will not tell us who it is.
And you're saying that someone demanding transparency into who the people are that are doing the firing of government employees and usurping Congress' enumerated control of spending, is engaging in Lawfare? Are you fucking nuts? This is a site for libertarians. Hopefully US patriots. Who the fuck would suggest that not only *shouldn't* that information be available to the public, but simply *asking for it* is "lawfare?? What the fuck? How deep can someone sink into the comfortable fatty womb of cultism? Jesus fucking christ.
All the federal govt is giving data to unknown employees who may or may not be vetted. Its not like they aren't known for leaking shit.
The usual pearl clutching is taking place because the wrong people, in this case, people trying to shut down government waste instead of proliferating it are getting their hands on their grift programs.
If such lawfare were a two way street, I wouldn't mind the transparency, but these are asshats that have sat back for decades while trillions has been wasted, and as soon as someone looks at turning it off, its a case of "But Muh Transparency".
Please take note of the handle of the person who described this as "lawfare."
I went to the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) website. They are quite up front that their purpose is to oppose Donald Trump and his actions in particular. FWIW and not that it invalidates any of their particular arguments
All this exposure of government waste and attempts to clean house is just killing our Reason-type libertarianists.
You're only supposed to talk about this in theory, it's fascism if you just go ahead and cut government.
Where is all the waste that is being cleaned up? "Just trust us", apparently.
FOIA requests are lawfare.
DOGE is Schroedinger's department, it is only bound by the law when you look at it... "from a certain point of view".
Where is all the waste that is being cleaned up?
Not sure if serious.
Sarckles the drunken idiot boy asked a similar question yesterday and I answered him here:
https://reason.com/2025/02/27/the-specifics-matter/?comments=true#comment-10936395
You literally copy-pasted a Republican Senator's press release. That isn't "proof" by any reasonable standard.
Oh fucking wow. So I would have to wait for your AP to copy-paste a press release before it comes true?
What if with the sweet, sweet USAID money disappearing they are unable to afford a copy-paster? I guess it wouldn't of happened, right lying Jeffy?
Anyway, that's all aside from the point because I challenge you to show us this press release you claim I copypasted from. Fucking duplicitous lying shill.
The "waste, fraud, and abuse" they have been so generous to share with the public has been one of two types: One being mistaken bullshit like fifty thousand or fifty million dollars or some other nonsense figure for condoms in Gaza. It's simply completely made-up bullshit.
Or, (and this is the majority so far) they talk about dollars which have been earmarked *specifically* by Congress through appropriations. They spin the descriptions in order to make them sound nonsensical. Like "35 million dollars to gather plastic shopping bags in Mexico!!!!" or some other bullfuck. Then, when you dig into it, it turns out that the money was requested fo,r AND APPROVED BY, CONGRESS to monitor and keep open cooling pipes to a nuclear reactor. Because, as it turns out, ocean currents cause floating plastic garbage (largely grocery bags, milk jugs, and other human refuse) will clog the intake, risking enormous damage to a nuclear power plant supplying half of Arizona's electricity or something.
It's the petty name-calling dismissiveness that keeps simple people from realizing *anything* about what is actually happening. And it's willfull ignorance to remain so intellectually lazy. You are complicit. This orange motherfucker is tearing our country apart, and people like you are too fucking simple to realize you have been conned. And the sunk cost fallacy keeps you trusting whatever the narcissistic motherfucker tells you. MAGAts will believe nearly *anything*, just as long as it's hyperbolic bullshit that keeps them feeling threatened and angry and scared.
Actually, reducing government power is the opposite of fascism, the central tenet of which is an all powerful state.
If reducing it somewhat while concentrating what remains of it outside of checks and balances or that pesky constitution, it may have.... unintended consequences for libertarians.
All of the DOGE documents are in the same cabinet with the manifesto of the Butler (almost) assassin.
Doesn't CREW have internet access?
BREAKING: Full President Trump x JD Vance x Zelenskyy argument (MUST WATCH
https://x.com/AutismCapital/status/1895532887325462926?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1895532887325462926%7Ctwgr%5E347a471ccf2858b3e3aea488662634ef17e877d2%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Frevolver.news%2Fnewsfeed%2F
Say what you will about the fecklessness of libertarians, your OCD and duplicitous fixation on government efficiency has informed a rather efficient government over the years (apart perhaps from the pentagon, the portion of government that doesn’t entertain such silly notions).
But it seems as if the mission is to efficiently make Elon Musk a trillionaire by stealing government resources for drug-fueled shits and giggles.
But thank God seven transgender people won’t get to play volleyball.
Thank God millions of actual women won't have to put up with autogynephilic perverts invading their spaces and destroying their sports events.
Hope it was worth the tens of thousands of dollars per year it’s going to cost you.
I just bought some useless dishes for decorative purposes but it was only like $60.
What the fuck are you talking about? How is it going to cost me if perverts can't beat up women in the Olympics or shower with tween girls at the pool?
Because what you paid for that wonderful and important prize was your social security and Medicare.
Fucking idiots. All of you.
Well, this is dumb. Obviously, "CREW" is just a buncha Sarcjeff Leftist asshats, but DOGE is/should still be covered by FOIA.
Not sure for what. The source agencies would be the ones with the proper response authority and an internal audit group existing doesn't change that. Now their results and criteria should be fairly transparent but there they are fairly clear if you're being honest.
Oh I love this. You're only allowed to say the correct answer if you preface it with the appropriate amount of virtue-signaling to signify that you are in the 'correct' crowd. As if the correct answer coming from the 'wrong people' doesn't really count.
It’s not virtue signaling if you believe both are true.
Which they are (though it seems that what they’re looking for should be released by the departments actually taking the action).
What records did the liberal outfit ask for? Kind of important. As FOIA has many exemptions especially regarding council of executive decisions. These get released after the fact, not during the process.
Given all the papers doxxing DOGE, there may be a concern there.
And Jesse slinks further down into the utilitarianism rabbit hole...
"Now their results and criteria should be fairly transparent but there they are fairly clear if you're being honest."
Honest? Are you nuts? Where is the information? Which website did anything actually make it on to. Hint: Just because Elon tells you he has made everything available does not mean that he has made *ANY* of it available. He told people his Tonkajeep was going to work too.
Fucking open your eyes. Or is that too woke?
If the FOIA is an all-powerful law, then how come so many people looking into the JFK assassination were turned down on their requests.
Plus, if the FOIA is an all-powerful law, then why are so many of the records requested redacted?
the Trump administration is arguing that its much-hyped Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) is exempt from public records requests.
The interesting aspect of this article is that it does not deny this assertion. CREW does, but not Reason. Instead Reason converts the problem from a legal issue to failing to live up to their commitment to transparency.
Meanwhile Executive Privilege has always been an exception to FOIA requests, and they don't have a lawyer expert opining on whether moving the DOGE between departments is legal. Either they didn't get an answer on that or they were told it's fine and didn't publish it. The usual suspects are running with the legal issue as if it's an established fact but that just shows they don't even understand enough about the issue to keep up.
This.
Without all the liberal activists leakers to push drama to Buzzfeed, they are now going to lawsuits.
Which tells me CJ doesn’t disagree with the assertion, just the optics.