Supreme Court takes on public access to DOGE records

The Trump administration asked the high court to help it conceal information about the controversial Elon Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency from an ethics watchdog.WASHINGTON (CN) — The Supreme Court agreed on Tuesday to review how much information the Trump administration can be forced to reveal about the now-defunct Department of Government Efficiency under public records requests.Earlier this year, an appeals court ordered discovery into the structure and work of the U.S. DOGE Service under a Freedom of Information Act request from an ethics watchdog. The Trump administration pushed the justices to review the decision, arguing it intruded on the autonomy and confidentiality of presidential advisers.According to the government, discovery in the case includes internal directives to employees and agencies, DOGE plans for data access and deposition of agency heads.“The court rubber-stamped those requests without determining that they are necessary, ‘precisely identified’ and narrowly tailored, and not excessively burdensome as to raising privileges or undermining executive branch duties,” the Trump administration wrote.Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, or CREW, filed a FOIA request after President Donald Trump transformed the U.S. Digital Service, a technology unit within the executive office, into the U.S. DOGE Service through an executive order. The group filed this suit after their request was ignored.Lower courts initially granted limited discovery, forcing DOGE to give the watchdog group information on personnel and some communications. The court also ordered DOGE Administrator Amy Gleason to be available for a deposition.But the Supreme Court determined the discovery orders weren’t properly tailored for separation of powers concerns. The 6-3 ruling on the shadow docket said judicial deference and restraint were needed in the context of discovery about internal executive branch communications.On remand, CREW withdrew all discovery requests involving recommendations made by DOGE employees and others. And the appeals court upheld the group’s remaining discovery requests about the structure of DOGE, its directives to cancel contracts and fire workers and examples of the agency exercising independent authority.The Trump administration is asking the Supreme Court to block CREW’s remaining requests, arguing they would result in time-consuming and burdensome litigation. However, the government also suggests the justices bar courts from ordering FOIA discovery requests against executive advisory bodies more generally.“Beyond this case, the court of appeals’ FOIA ruling threatens to burden future presidential administrations with FOIA suits designed to leverage discovery against advisers in the executive office,” the government wrote.The Trump administration argues DOGE isn’t subject to FOIA requests since it’s not a real agency but rather a presidential advisory body within the executive office. Certain presidential advisers are exempt from requests for information so they can provide confidential advice to the president.CREW urged the court to deny the petition, claiming the administration’s proposed rule would be ripe for abuse.“It would allow the executive to establish hugely consequential entities like USDS, while sidestepping an important sunshine law, simply by placing those entities in EOP and obscuring the precise nature of their delegated authority,” the watchdog wrote.DOGE shut down operations on July 4. Thus, CREW said discovery represents a backward-looking inquiry into past operations.“Given those developments, there is neither any meaningful harm to the executive branch nor a pressing reason for this court to take this case,” the group wrote.With the help of billionaire Elon Musk, DOGE slashed government programs, carried out mass layoffs of federal employees and even dismantled USAID during its 18-month run. Despite DOGE’s goal to balance the budget, there is little evidence the agency met its objectives.Subscribe to our free newslettersOur weekly newsletter Closing Arguments offers the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world, while the monthly Under the Lights dishes the legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.Additional Reads