Trump Admin Fights for DOGE Secrecy at Supreme Court

The Trump administration is escalating its battle to shield the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from public scrutiny, taking its case to the Supreme Court. The move comes after DOGE refused to comply with Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, prompting a legal challenge from a watchdog group.

DOJ Claims “Intrusive Discovery” Threatens Presidential Advice

The Department of Justice (DOJ) argues that a lower court’s order requiring DOGE to disclose information about its cost-cutting initiatives constitutes “sweeping, intrusive discovery.” Solicitor General John Sauer contends that as a presidential advisory body, DOGE is exempt from FOIA and should not be subjected to such demands.

According to Sauer, the district court’s order “turns FOIA on its head,” forcing DOGE to reveal sensitive internal deliberations under the guise of determining whether FOIA even applies. He claims this violates the separation of powers by threatening the confidentiality and candor of presidential advice.

CREW Seeks Transparency into DOGE’s Operations

The legal battle stems from a lawsuit filed by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), a nonprofit watchdog group. CREW sought information about DOGE’s activities through FOIA requests, but DOGE officials refused to provide the requested records, leading to the lawsuit.

Judge Initially Sides with Transparency

US District Judge Christopher Cooper initially sided with CREW, stating that DOGE is likely covered by FOIA and that the public would be irreparably harmed by delaying the release of the requested records. He ordered DOGE to expedite the processing of CREW’s request.

Cooper later ruled that CREW was entitled to limited discovery to determine whether DOGE wields substantial authority independent of the President, thus making it subject to FOIA.

Appeals Court Unswayed by Government’s Argument

The Trump administration’s attempt to overturn Cooper’s ruling in the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit was unsuccessful. The appeals court denied the government’s petition, stating that the discovery was modest in scope and did not target the President or any close advisor personally.

The appeals court also dismissed the government’s claim that the process was too burdensome, noting that the identified burdens were limited in time and reach.

DOGE’s Role Under Scrutiny

CREW argues that DOGE operates with significant power but lacks proper oversight and transparency. Their lawsuit alleges that DOGE “has worked in the shadows,” controlling major government functions without accountability.

The Trump administration is currently fighting numerous DOGE-related lawsuits at various levels of the court system. The outcome of this Supreme Court case could have significant implications for the transparency and accountability of presidential advisory bodies.

Key Points:

• The Trump administration is seeking Supreme Court intervention to protect DOGE from FOIA requests.
• The DOJ argues that DOGE is a presidential advisory body and exempt from FOIA.
• CREW seeks transparency into DOGE’s operations, alleging a lack of oversight.

[Link to original article]