Early Monday morning, employees at the US Agency for International Development (USAID), the agency in charge of conducting humanitarian efforts around the world, were told not to come to work. Over the last few days, USAID’s website and social media accounts went dark and photos were removed from the office walls. Thousands of contractors and civil servants lost access to their email addresses and the USAID systems without warning. A week earlier, nearly 400 people from the agency were laid off.
This came after a separate email was sent last week, on Jan. 28, to most of the nation’s federal employees. The email, titled “Fork in the Road,” offered almost all of the 2.3 million employees an opportunity to resign immediately and continue to be paid until September 30, or stay on at the risk that there would be no “assurance regarding the certainty of your position or agency.”
On Friday, the highest-ranking career official in the Treasury Department was ousted after refusing to turn over the keys to the payment system used by the US Treasury – a payment system that sends out trillions of dollars every year. David Lebryk had worked in the department for over 35 years, and had been named by President Donald Trump as acting secretary while Scott Bessent went through the confirmation hearing process.
These seismic shifts in the federal government have one person in common: Elon Musk, and his new “Department of Government Efficiency.”
How does Musk, who is neither an elected official, a government employee, or a Senate-confirmed appointee, have this much power over the United States government?
On Trump’s first day in office, he signed an executive order called Establishing And Implementing The President’s “Department Of Government Efficiency,” which renamed an existing White House office, the US Digital Service, to DOGE. The Digital Service had been in charge of designing digital government tools. That included things like systems that people use to access Social Security or veteran’s benefits online.
The order says that DOGE would be “modernizing federal technology and software to maximize governmental efficiency and productivity.” Trump and Musk have said DOGE will cut government spending, make bureaucracy more efficient, and reduce the federal workforce.
But much of what Musk has done so far may not even be legal.
And that includes him attempting to shutter USAID, the agency in charge of international humanitarian assistance.
The Takeover of USAID
This weekend, about eight DOGE workers tried to gain access to classified systems and floors at USAID’s headquarters in Washington, DC, according to The Wall Street Journal. Security officials within USAID denied them access. Those officials were then put on administrative leave by the Trump administration for not complying. It is not clear who gave the order putting them on leave.
Then, USAID personnel received an email that read, “At the direction of Agency leadership, the USAID headquarters at the Ronald Reagan building in Washington, D.C. will be closed to Agency personnel on Monday, February 3, 2025.” According to The Associated Press, two State Department employees who tried to go to the USAID offices on Monday were turned away by security guards, and Department of Homeland Security officials later blocked the lobby of the headquarters with yellow tape.
Also this weekend, Musk posted on X: “USAID is a criminal organization. Time for it to die.” On Monday, during a live session on X, Musk said, “It became apparent that it’s not an apple with a worm in it. What we have is just a ball of worms. You’ve got to basically get rid of the whole thing. It’s beyond repair. We’re shutting it down.” He said Trump “agreed we should shut it down.”
The same day, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said he is the new acting director of USAID, and that while “a lot of functions of USAID are going to continue,” it needed to “be aligned with American foreign policy.” It was later reported that USAID would be merged into the State Department and that State Department officials were told to begin a "review and potential reorganization of USAID's activities to maximize efficiency and align operations."
Is this legal?
USAID was created as an independent agency by the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998. When asked if he thinks Congress would be needed to eliminate USAID, President Trump responded, “I don’t think so. Not when it comes to fraud. If there’s fraud. Those people are lunatics. And, if it comes to fraud you wouldn’t have an act of Congress, and I’m not sure you would anyway.”
Congress also controls the purse strings when it comes to agency budgets, and the money for USAID has already been appropriated, which raises questions about impounding money already appropriated by Congress. Gabe Fleisher explained this in The Preamble last week – presidents cannot just second guess Congress.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said any effort to dissolve USAID would be “illegal and against our national interests.”
Democratic lawmakers gathered outside of the USAID’s Washington office on Monday. There, Sen. Chris Murphy said, “We will use every power that we have at our disposal in the US Senate. My colleagues will do the same thing in the House. This is a constitutional crisis that we are in today. Let’s not pull any punches about why this is happening. Elon Musk makes billions of dollars off of his business with China. And China is cheering at this action today. There is no question that the billionaire class trying to take over our government right now is doing it based on self-interest.”
Nearly a dozen representatives joined Sens. Murphy, Chris Van Hollen, and Brian Schatz outside of the headquarters. Schatz has said he will hold up all of Trump’s nominees for the State Department until USAID is "functional" again.
Van Hollen said he would do the same.
Cutting the federal workforce
The “fork in the road” proposal presented by the Office of Personnel Management, or OPM, saying that federal employees can either resign voluntarily or stay at their own risk, is not the “get paid for not working” proposal that it seemed to be initially.
According to CBS News, OPM said that anyone who accepted their “deferred resignation” plan would be immediately placed on administrative leave and stop all work. They would supposedly get regular paychecks for several months afterward.
But there are no guarantees in the offer, and there is nothing that stops someone who accepted the offer from being terminated before the resignation date. If the government does not designate enough funds to cover their salary, the FAQ says that they may not get paid.
The American Federation of Government Employees, a union that represents DC and federal workers, warned members that it “is unclear whether OPM has the legal authority to support the Program or its alleged benefits, and the eligibility criteria are vague.” They urged employees not to take the program at face value. They said, “The Program documentation, including the introductory email, an associated guidance memorandum… are riddled with inconsistencies and uncertainties.”
Two agency officials confirmed that aides to Musk locked OPM officials out of their computer systems. Over the last several days, Musk has installed several of his allies from his own companies, including SpaceX, Twitter (now X), and xAI, in senior leadership positions at OPM.
Several people familiar with the Fork in the Road letter told The Washington Post that OPM career staff (including employees who have stayed through multiple administrations) were not involved in drafting the proposal to the millions of workers, and neither were top officials at the White House Budget Office.
Is this legal?
Probably not. There are questions about whether OPM has the authority to offer paid leave for government employees outside of its own office. In a fact sheet on its website, OPM states they do “not regulate the use of administrative leave. This authority rests with each agency head.”
Sen. Tim Kaine said, “The President has no authority to make that offer. There’s no budget line item to pay people who are not showing up for work. If you accept that offer and resign, he’ll stiff you.”
It also again raises questions about blocking funding already approved by Congress, and right now, Congress only approved funding through March 14.
Donald Kettl, professor emeritus at the University of Maryland School of Public Policy, told NPR that “the executive branch cannot legally now obligate the government to make payments past March 14. An offer for paid leave past that point is unlawful."
Kettl pointed to the Anti-Deficiency Act which reads: "no officer or employee of the Government may create or authorize an obligation in excess of the funds available, or in advance of appropriations unless otherwise authorized by law.” In other words, you can’t spend money Congress has not told people they could spend.
Treasury Department
Back to the Treasury: the official who resigned, David Lebryk, oversaw the payments made by the Treasury Department. After his resignation, the Trump administration granted DOGE officials’ request to access the Treasury's payment system, and it’s still unclear what they intend to do with that access. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent signed off on the request from DOGE members, who can now see the personal details of people who receive government payments.
Is this legal?
Trump’s executive order instructed all agencies to ensure that DOGE has “full and prompt access to all unclassified agency records, software systems, and IT systems.” Whether this executive order is legal in itself is in question. There are three pending lawsuits against DOGE, all accusing DOGE of violating federal transparency laws which require “advisory committees” to follow certain rules and procedures.
A new lawsuit filed Monday alleges the department is going against the Privacy Act of 1974, which established practices on how federal agencies can manage personal information. The Alliance of Retired Americans, the American Federation of Government Employees, and the Service Employees International Union’s lawsuit all allege Bessent violated the law by forcing Lebryk out of the department.
The Privacy Act requires government agencies that want to make major changes to public data to announce that change in a public notice and give people 30 days to comment on the change. The lawsuit says Bessent didn’t follow the proper procedure when he forced Lebryk out and now the public does not know who has access to their sensitive data.
Further, if Musk tries to block any payments, he would certainly face legal challenges. That money is appropriated by Congress and designated for certain agencies.
Sen. Ron Wyden, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, sent a letter to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent saying he is “concerned that Musk’s enormous business operation in China -- a country whose intelligence agencies have stolen vast amounts of sensitive data about Americans, including U.S. government employee data by hacking U.S. government systems -- endangers U.S. cybersecurity and creates conflicts of interest that make his access to these systems a national security risk.”
Wyden continued, "To put it bluntly, these payment systems simply cannot fail, and any politically-motivated meddling in them risks severe damage to our country and the economy. I am deeply concerned that following the federal grant and loan freeze earlier this week, these officials associated with Musk may have intended to access these payment systems to illegally withhold payments to any number of programs.”
In short, his takeover of all these departments and agencies is not only unprecedented, but it puts Americans’ security at risk. Musk and his aides now have access to a large amount of private data, such as social security numbers, full names, home addresses, banking information, and more.
What could stop him?
Musk has told people that he’s sleeping at the DOGE headquarters, which is in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, located right near the White House. Wired also reports Musk told associates he’d been invited to spend the night in the Lincoln Bedroom, inside the White House itself. So it does not appear that President Trump has intentions to curtail Elon Musk’s powers anytime soon.
What can you do?
A few things:
Raise public awareness. This is an unprecedented power grab by an unelected, unapproved individual, and we have no assurances that our personal data will not be used in inappropriate ways. Share this article, talk to your friends and family about what is happening, and if you like, talk about what’s happening on social media. The public needs to be aware.
If you are a federal employee, know your rights and the law. Don’t presuppose defeat and refuse to resist.
Contact your congressional representation, no matter the party, and let them know that you’re not OK with the lack of transparency and your personal information being accessed with no oversight.
Here is a page where you can find your Representative.
And here’s how you can find your Senators.