Elon Musk conflict complaints appear moot with Trump in charge

WASHINGTON — As Democrats in Congress claim that billionaire Elon Musk’s business interests conflict with his White House role, those versed in federal ethics say it largely falls on President Donald Trump and his Cabinet — not independent watchdog agencies — to enforce such rules.

That makes it unlikely that Musk, the de facto head of Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency as a designated special government employee, could face consequences under conflict of interest law, according to several experts asked to examine his situation through the lens of federal rules.

Democrats accuse Musk of interfering with the operations and contracts of NASA and the Federal Aviation Administration because he is CEO of SpaceX, an entity regulated by the FAA, and its satellite subsidiary Starlink.

Those tensions came to a head last month over allegations that Musk influenced the FAA to back out of a $2.4 billion contract with Verizon Communications Inc. in favor of Starlink. Musk criticized the contract and added that “Starlink terminals are being sent at NO COST to the taxpayer on an emergency basis to restore air traffic control connectivity.”

SpaceX later said that there “is no effort or intent for Starlink to ‘take over’” the contract, and that it was working with the FAA to test the use of Starlink as a part of an infrastructure upgrade.

The allegations triggered outrage from Democrats in Congress, including Sens. Tammy Duckworth of Illinois and Adam B. Schiff of California, who wrote to NASA questioning Musk’s compliance with federal standards. Schiff also asked Office of Government Ethics Director David Huitema about Musk, although Huitema was later fired and replaced by an acting director.

Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation ranking member Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., was one of the first members to raise questions about Musk’s potential conflicts, including to Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy at the beginning of February. Cantwell has not received a response, according to congressional staff members.

In response to questions about the contract, the FAA said in a statement that it is testing multiple communication technologies across several companies to update the air traffic control system. “Beyond that, no decisions for other deployments have been made,” FAA said, declining to comment on the status of the Verizon contract.

Democrats also criticized an event on Tuesday in which Musk’s car company Tesla Inc. showcased vehicles on the White House South Lawn after Tesla shares fell more than 40% since Trump took office. Trump called the cars “beautiful” and said he would buy one.

“We’re very concerned, because you can’t blur the lines on this,” Cantwell said in an interview, promising that Democrats on the Commerce panel will continue to probe, even as Chairman Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said the majority isn’t looking into such claims.

“Using the White House as a car showroom is only the most visible of what he’s doing,” Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., said in an interview. “Elon Musk is the face and voice of corrupt exploitative use of power … you know, it’s so blatant that it’s almost beyond belief, but it cries out for action.” Blumenthal said he’s considering legislation to strengthen the Office of Government Ethics, which he said would focus on stricter enforcement.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in February that Musk will excuse himself if he comes across a conflict of interest with the contracts and the funding that DOGE is overseeing.

“As for concerns regarding conflicts of interest between Elon Musk and DOGE, President Trump has stated he will not allow conflicts,” she said. “DOGE has been incredibly transparent about what they’re doing, posting daily updates on X and updating their website.”

‘Lawless’ zone

Federal ethics experts note that while conflict-of-interest rules apply to Musk, complaints against him are unlikely to be resolved by some independent body.

Richard Painter, law professor at the University of Minnesota and chief White House ethics lawyer under President George W. Bush, said in a hearing last month that special government employees, such as Musk, overseeing contracts that could impact their private investments are required, under law, to divest or give up their federal position.

Painter added that Musk needn’t publicly disclose his financial information because he was designated as a specific kind of special government employee that’s only required to submit a private financial disclosure to the White House.

Although the Office of Government Ethics provides guidance on complying with conflict of interest law and various Inspector General offices investigate claims, an employee’s agency has the responsibility to take action.

In Musk’s case, that “agency” is the White House, an official confirmed.

Neither the White House nor Transportation Department responded to questions regarding whether Musk privately disclosed financial information to officials or if they have investigated conflict of interest allegations.

The Campaign Legal Center, a nonprofit watchdog, on Thursday filed a complaint with the Transportation Department’s Office of Inspector General calling for an investigation into Musk’s conflicts.

Dylan Hedtler-Gaudette, director of government affairs at nonpartisan independent watchdog Project on Government Oversight, said that the OIG may choose to investigate, but if the White House does not take any action, it would fall on the Justice Department to bring a case against Musk since the conflict of interest statute is a criminal one.

It’s unlikely that Attorney General Pamela Bondi, one of Trump’s defense lawyers during his first impeachment trial, will bring such charges against Musk. Painter noted as well the Supreme Court ruling that presidents have absolute immunity for acts taken as president, which means that Trump can intervene in prosecutions.

“That means little hope for the independence of the Justice Department to even handily prosecute criminal cases,” Painter said.

Hedtler-Gaudette added that the lack of independent enforcement predates Trump and Musk, and it means the law operates on officials acting in “decent and honorable ways, respecting norms and precedent and caring about the sanctity of the office.” To strengthen the Office of Government Ethics and other independent watchdogs, Congress would have to pass legislation.

“So we do appear to be in kind of a lawless, accountability-free zone when it comes to ethics and financial disclosures and things like that right now,” he said.