Judge Chutkan denies Democrat-led effort to block DOGE access, citing lack of proven harm

[anatta]

another victory against waste, fraud and DEI

Judge denies Democrat-led effort to block DOGE access, citing lack of proven harm

A Wasington, D.C.-based federal judge has declined to block billionaire Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from accessing government data or firing federal employees.

www.foxnews.com

U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan declined to grant the plaintiffs' request to issue a temporary restraining order, citing what she said was their failure to demonstrate evidence of "irreparable harm" caused by DOGE's access.

"Plaintiffs legitimately call into question what appears to be the unchecked authority of an unelected individual and an entity that was not created by Congress and over which it has no oversight," Judge Chutkan, an Obama appointee, said Tuesday.


"In these circumstances, it must be indisputable that this court acts within the bounds of its authority. Accordingly, it cannot issue a TRO, especially one as wide-ranging as Plaintiffs request, without clear evidence of imminent, irreparable harm to these Plaintiffs. The current record does not meet that standard."

 

[ColdHardTruth]

another victory against waste, fraud and DEI

Judge denies Democrat-led effort to block DOGE access, citing lack of proven harm

A Wasington, D.C.-based federal judge has declined to block billionaire Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from accessing government data or firing federal employees.

www.foxnews.com

U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan declined to grant the plaintiffs' request to issue a temporary restraining order, citing what she said was their failure to demonstrate evidence of "irreparable harm" caused by DOGE's access.

"Plaintiffs legitimately call into question what appears to be the unchecked authority of an unelected individual and an entity that was not created by Congress and over which it has no oversight," Judge Chutkan, an Obama appointee, said Tuesday.


"In these circumstances, it must be indisputable that this court acts within the bounds of its authority. Accordingly, it cannot issue a TRO, especially one as wide-ranging as Plaintiffs request, without clear evidence of imminent, irreparable harm to these Plaintiffs. The current record does not meet that standard."

Faux is not a valid source.

Please find a valid source and try again.

 

[anatta]

Faux is not a valid source.

Please find a valid source and try again.

its a RULING. find your own if it bothers you

 

[ncguy]

another victory against waste, fraud and DEI

Judge denies Democrat-led effort to block DOGE access, citing lack of proven harm

A Wasington, D.C.-based federal judge has declined to block billionaire Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from accessing government data or firing federal employees.

www.foxnews.com

U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan declined to grant the plaintiffs' request to issue a temporary restraining order, citing what she said was their failure to demonstrate evidence of "irreparable harm" caused by DOGE's access.

"Plaintiffs legitimately call into question what appears to be the unchecked authority of an unelected individual and an entity that was not created by Congress and over which it has no oversight," Judge Chutkan, an Obama appointee, said Tuesday.


"In these circumstances, it must be indisputable that this court acts within the bounds of its authority. Accordingly, it cannot issue a TRO, especially one as wide-ranging as Plaintiffs request, without clear evidence of imminent, irreparable harm to these Plaintiffs. The current record does not meet that standard."

not much of a victory from a judge who said ""Plaintiffs legitimately call into question what appears to be the unchecked authority of an unelected individual and an entity that was not created by Congress and over which it has no oversight," Judge Chutkan, an Obama appointee, said Tuesday."

this doesn't end the lawsuit.

 

[Athanasius68]

another victory against waste, fraud and DEI

Judge denies Democrat-led effort to block DOGE access, citing lack of proven harm

A Wasington, D.C.-based federal judge has declined to block billionaire Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from accessing government data or firing federal employees.

www.foxnews.com

U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan declined to grant the plaintiffs' request to issue a temporary restraining order, citing what she said was their failure to demonstrate evidence of "irreparable harm" caused by DOGE's access.

"Plaintiffs legitimately call into question what appears to be the unchecked authority of an unelected individual and an entity that was not created by Congress and over which it has no oversight," Judge Chutkan, an Obama appointee, said Tuesday.


"In these circumstances, it must be indisputable that this court acts within the bounds of its authority. Accordingly, it cannot issue a TRO, especially one as wide-ranging as Plaintiffs request, without clear evidence of imminent, irreparable harm to these Plaintiffs. The current record does not meet that standard."

There were two rulings today that helped re-balance the 'separation of powers.'

This one, which reiterated that the Executive is allowed to actually control the Executive Dept.

And the student loan decision, which overturned the Biden Admin forgiving of student loans. That was rooted in the fact that the Executive is not all powerful, and he cannot appropriate money on his own hook.

 

[JMR]

"Plaintiffs legitimately call into question what appears to be the unchecked authority of an unelected individual and an entity that was not created by Congress and over which it has no oversight,"

She does not question the basis of the request, but says her authority does not extend to issuing a temporary restraining order without further evidence

 

[Athanasius68]

not much of a victory from a judge who said ""Plaintiffs legitimately call into question what appears to be the unchecked authority of an unelected individual and an entity that was not created by Congress and over which it has no oversight," Judge Chutkan, an Obama appointee, said Tuesday."

this doesn't end the lawsuit.

It ends it. That quotation is just Chutkans sour grapes.
An appeals court will not overturn.

And that Is because it is an absurdity to suggest that the Executive does not have the authority to examine expenditures within the very department he has been elected to oversee.

 

[trixare4kids]

another victory against waste, fraud and DEI

Judge denies Democrat-led effort to block DOGE access, citing lack of proven harm

A Wasington, D.C.-based federal judge has declined to block billionaire Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from accessing government data or firing federal employees.

www.foxnews.com

U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan declined to grant the plaintiffs' request to issue a temporary restraining order, citing what she said was their failure to demonstrate evidence of "irreparable harm" caused by DOGE's access.

"Plaintiffs legitimately call into question what appears to be the unchecked authority of an unelected individual and an entity that was not created by Congress and over which it has no oversight," Judge Chutkan, an Obama appointee, said Tuesday.


"In these circumstances, it must be indisputable that this court acts within the bounds of its authority. Accordingly, it cannot issue a TRO, especially one as wide-ranging as Plaintiffs request, without clear evidence of imminent, irreparable harm to these Plaintiffs. The current record does not meet that standard."

The winning just keeps coming! As many have said, what harm comes from curbing waste, fraud and abuse? No irreparable harm comes from discovering it either!

The Democrats are pushing yet another false and dangerous narrative attempting to gain some of their own power they've lost. The good thing, Judge Chutkan has a lot of common sense. There is simply no proof of what the Democrats have alleged.

 

[ncguy]

It ends it. That quotation is just Chutkans sour grapes.
An appeals court will not overturn.

And that Is because it is an absurdity to suggest that the Executive does not have the authority to examine expenditures within the very department he has been elected to oversee.

how does it "end it"? this ruling only pertains to an emergency TRO request, not any longer term legal battles.

 

[ncguy]

The winning just keeps coming! As many of have said, what harm comes from curbing waste, fraud and abuse? No irreparable harm comes from discovering it either!

The Democrats are pushing yet another false and dangerous narrative attempting to gain some of their own power they've lost. The good thing, Judge Chutkan has a lot of common sense. There is simply no proof of what the Democrats have alleged.

what harm could possibly come from untrained unqualified people doing things like posting classified data for example? having access to unlimited private personal data? /s

 

[Lursa]

She does not question the basis of the request, but says her authority does not extend to issuing a temporary restraining order without further evidence

Hopefully they will acquire the needed evidence and re-file.

 

[trixare4kids]

what harm could possibly come from untrained unqualified people doing things like posting classified data for example? having access to unlimited private personal data? /s

Read her ruling. It will eventually come to you. I'm sorry you think you know more than the judicial.

 

[JMR]

The winning just keeps coming! As many have said, what harm comes from curbing waste, fraud and abuse? No irreparable harm comes from discovering it either!

The Democrats are pushing yet another false and dangerous narrative attempting to gain some of their own power they've lost. The good thing, Judge Chutkan has a lot of common sense. There is simply no proof of what the Democrats have alleged.

She had a lot of common sense when she was overseeing Trump's election interference case, and he called her the "most evil person".

 

[Athanasius68]

how does it "end it"? this ruling only pertains to an emergency TRO request, not any longer term legal battles.

The only way for these 'blue state' DAs to ultimately win is to make a convincing argument that the Executive of the USA (the president) doesn't have authority over the Executive Dept.
One need only recognize this to realize that no such argument will ever be convincingly made.

 

[ncguy]

Read her ruling. It will eventually come to you. I'm sorry you think you know more than the judicial.

where am I wrong? did she rule that no more lawsuits could be filed on the matter? quote me on that from her ruling.

 

[ncguy]

The only way for these 'blue state' DAs to ultimately win is to make a convincing argument that the Executive of the USA (the president) doesn't have authority over the Executive Dept.
One need only recognize this to realize that no such argument will ever be convincingly made.

feel free to quote an actual legal expert saying that.
random anonymous internet posters have zero legal credibility.

 

[Lutherf]

another victory against waste, fraud and DEI

Judge denies Democrat-led effort to block DOGE access, citing lack of proven harm

A Wasington, D.C.-based federal judge has declined to block billionaire Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from accessing government data or firing federal employees.

www.foxnews.com

U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan declined to grant the plaintiffs' request to issue a temporary restraining order, citing what she said was their failure to demonstrate evidence of "irreparable harm" caused by DOGE's access.

"Plaintiffs legitimately call into question what appears to be the unchecked authority of an unelected individual and an entity that was not created by Congress and over which it has no oversight," Judge Chutkan, an Obama appointee, said Tuesday.


"In these circumstances, it must be indisputable that this court acts within the bounds of its authority. Accordingly, it cannot issue a TRO, especially one as wide-ranging as Plaintiffs request, without clear evidence of imminent, irreparable harm to these Plaintiffs. The current record does not meet that standard."

Fake News!

You linked to FOX so the story is fake. Sure, I read it on CBS too but, since it was reported by FOX, that makes it fake.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Faux is not a valid source.

Please find a valid source and try again.

That is kind of ridiculous. I don't like Fox News, but it is a judicial ruling, its not like they are making it up out of whole cloth.

 

[Loulit01]

There were two rulings today that helped re-balance the 'separation of powers.'

This one, which reiterated that the Executive is allowed to actually control the Executive Dept.

And the student loan decision, which overturned the Biden Admin forgiving of student loans. That was rooted in the fact that the Executive is not all powerful, and he cannot appropriate money on his own hook.

Good thing Trump never appropriates money under his own hook.

 

[trixare4kids]

She had a lot of common sense when she was overseeing Trump's election interference case, and he called her the "most evil person".

So then nothing about this thread or her ruling on the topic then?

 

[TobyOne]

What? The legal argument of "We don't like Musk because he supports Trump" didn't work? Shocking.

 

[Anthony60]

This suit was so bad that even a left wing judge would put her name on it.

 

[NOLA Dude]

Faux is not a valid source.

Please find a valid source and try again.

Constant crying about sources. Nobody cares what you think about which sources we should use.

Is there something inaccurate in the article? If so point it out specifically. If you can't point out what's inaccurate then who cares?

 

[trixare4kids]

where am I wrong? did she rule that no more lawsuits could be filed on the matter? quote me on that from her ruling.

Read her ruling. You're adding all your own what if hypotheticals to her ruling.

 

[ncguy]

What? The legal argument of "We don't like Musk because he supports Trump" didn't work? Shocking.

Chutkan went on to say that even though the states’ larger case against Musk is “strong,” their arguments at this stage in the litigation were not good enough to satisfy the standard that must be met to warrant emergency action by the court.

“Plaintiffs raise a colorable Appointments Clause claim with serious implications. Musk has not been nominated by the President nor confirmed by the U.S. Senate, as constitutionally required for officers who exercise ‘significant authority pursuant to the laws of the United States,’” she wrote. “But even a strong merits argument cannot secure a temporary restraining order at this juncture.”

feel free to read that to educate yourself on the legal argument.