Elon Musk appears to be breaking the law, violating the Constitution, and executing a coup against the government and people of the United States. However, few in power act like they understand what is happening or are doing much to stop it.
The billionaire and a team of college-age tech company employees have control of the government’s most sensitive federal payment systems. Within days, Musk is poised to eliminate entire government agencies and cancel funding streams mandated by Congress, which is illegal.
Musk’s actions put Americans in danger. USAID, which he’s vowed to crush, not only ensures the health and welfare of millions worldwide; it bolsters global security and advances the standing and interests of the United States, as President John F. Kennedy made clear when he began the initiative in the executive branch in the throes of the Cold War. (Since then, Congress has made it an independent agency.) A South African mogul is now locking 600 USAID employees out of computer access. On Tuesday, Trump seemed to put the agency’s employees on leave. Canceling its funding is already creating devastating impacts. When the U.S. retreats, hostile foreign powers step in.
Musk and his twenty-something assistants do not understand the systems they are tinkering with. Social media reports from government employees abound of loose digital security practices, with government data being copied onto private servers without documentation or justification. (But what about her emails?) American citizens’ private data could fall prey to hostile actors. Worse, the intricate systems that ensure that, for instance, Medicare and Social Security payments get to recipients could break down—much as many of Twitter’s core functions often stopped working after Musk bought the social media platform. It’s one thing if X is glitchy and vulnerable to foreign interference. The consequences of botching the software responsible for $6 trillion in payments could lead to a global economic meltdown.
Neither Trump nor Musk can cut funding mandated by Congress or excise whole agencies on a whim without committing a crime. Yes, the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)—an ersatz department, not a real one—can examine government spending and recommend cuts. It does not have the authority to strip funding unilaterally.
Even if he hews to the law, it’s unclear if Musk is authorized to carry out his mission, which could put him in additional legal jeopardy. Trump claims that Musk is a “special government employee,” but there is no official record of his appointment or those working under him. There is no indication that Musk or his minions have signed the ethics agreements or made the legally required disclosures. It is unclear whether DOGE, which operates out of the Executive Office of the President, maintains public records of its activities as required by law. Musk has tried to keep the identities of his employees secret, banning from X those who have revealed their identities and baselessly accusing them of breaking the law.
The Impoundment Control Act of 1974 prevents the Executive Branch from withholding funds appropriated by Congress. Congress passed it because Richard Nixon had attempted to do just that. The reason is apparent: if the president could do this, the president would be a king, and Congress would become mostly irrelevant, as would the courts. A president who disliked judicial rulings could respond by cutting that court’s funding and denying salaries to its employees.
That Trump and Project 2025 ideologues claim the Impoundment Act is unconstitutional does not make it so. They look to the Supreme Court, hoping for a favorable ruling, but that does not make it legal now. Two lower court judges have declared Trump’s federal funding freeze illegal and insisted on reinstatement. (It is unclear whether the Trump administration is complying with the orders.) Even this Supreme Court is unlikely to sanction such overreach, if only because this administration and all future ones would forever undercut the high court’s authority and independence.
Everyone harmed by these acts, whether constituents denied aid or employees denied a salary, has standing to hold Musk and his employees civilly liable. As president, the only accountability Donald Trump faces is impeachment. But as private citizens, Musk and those under him can be held accountable.
Democrats must respond like this is a crisis unlike any other in their careers. Until Monday morning, they mostly made perfunctory statements about the potential economic impact of tariffs. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York seems content to lay the groundwork for the midterms two years hence, saying that he expects that “Trump will screw up.” Democrats do not have that much time. It’s not alarmist to say that unless they slow or stop this madness, there may not be free and fair midterm elections, and it may not be possible to fix what Musk has broken. Senator Brian Schatz, the Hawaii Democrat, has said he will place holds on all State Department nominations until USAID funding is restored. That’s a good start. But Washington needs to grind to a halt until the rule of law is restored. Democrats should hold press conferences in front of all the federal buildings in which Musk and his employees are committing crimes, not just USAID, which a few did this week. Unanimous consent must be denied in the Senate. Whatever else Democrats can do within the law to stop this, they must do to avoid the destruction of the American government. There’s no time left to waste.
