WASHINGTON — A federal judge ruled that Elon Musk likely exercised unconstitutional power in orchestrating the Trump administration’s efforts to shutter the U.S. agency that manages foreign aid.

Although the decision on Tuesday is limited to the U.S. Agency for International Development, it marks the most direct ruling to date regarding the lawfulness of the role that the billionaire chief executive officer of Tesla Inc. has occupied in the White House since President Donald Trump took office in January.

U.S. District Judge Theodore Chuang wrote that the current and former USAID employees and contractors who sued were likely to succeed in arguing that when it came to the decision to permanently close the agency’s headquarters, Musk “exercised significant authority” reserved for officers of the US in violation of the Constitution’s Appointments Clause.

Chuang barred Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency from taking actions related to the agency’s closing, sharing personal information about the employees or otherwise taking other actions there without approval from a USAID official.

The judge also directed DOGE to restore access to emails and other electronic systems for current USAID employees and contractors, even if they’ve been placed on administrative leave.

White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said in a statement that the administration “will appeal this miscarriage of justice and fight back against all activist judges intruding on the separation of powers.”

Although the administration has represented in court that Musk isn’t the formal head of the US DOGE Service and doesn’t have authority to make decisions at agencies, Chuang found that the plaintiffs presented significant evidence that he was nevertheless exercising that power. During a hearing last month, Chuang had said that he found the administration’s explanations about Musk’s role “highly suspicious.”

In Tuesday’s decision, the judge cited Trump’s statements about putting Musk “in charge” and wrote that Musk’s comments and social media posts “demonstrate that he has firm control over DOGE.”

The Appointments Clause “would be reduced to nothing more than a technical formality” if a president could “escape” scrutiny by having White House advisers “bypass duly appointed officers,” the judge wrote.

Chuang also found that the administration’s push to dismantle USAID, which was created by Congress, likely violated the Constitution’s separation of powers principles.

“The public interest is specifically harmed by defendants’ actions, which have usurped the authority of the public’s elected representatives in Congress to make decisions on whether, when, and how to eliminate a federal government agency,” the judge wrote.

The case is Does v. Musk, 25-cv-462, US District Court, District of Maryland (Greenbelt).

©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Visit bloomberg.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.