As President Trump and DOGE continue their attempts to dismantle the fraud and waste in our government, there are some judges who think that they can read the minds of both the president and Elon Musk, believing they also possess the power to overrule based on such assumptions, facts be damned.

One of the latest cases, from Obama-appointee U.S. District Judge Theodore Chuang’s 68-page opinion, via NPR:

‘[T]he Court finds that Defendants’ actions taken to shut down USAID on an accelerated basis, including its apparent decision to permanently close USAID headquarters without the approval of a duly appointed USAID Officer, likely violated the United States Constitution in multiple ways, and that these actions harmed not only Plaintiffs, but also the public interest, because they deprived the public's elected representatives in Congress of their constitutional authority to decide whether, when, and how to close down an agency created by Congress.’

The judge has a major flaw in his decision. No “decision” has been made by anyone in the Trump administration to permanently shutter USAID. The work of the agency has been drastically reduced, including personnel, but some services are being maintained and overseen by the Secretary of State, Marco Rubio.

Judge Chuang has convinced himself of several distortions of events, thereby assuming that the president has violated the Constitution. His actions are so clearly partisan that even Democrats should be embarrassed. What are the judge’s blatant and deceitful attempts to upend the DOGE efforts?

He essentially accuses the president of lying:

In his ruling, Chuang wrote that ‘the evidence presently favors the conclusion that contrary to Defendants’ sweeping claim that Musk has acted only as an advisor, Musk made the decisions to shutdown USAID’s headquarters and website even though he lacked the authority to make that decision.’

The facts are that Elon Musk is only an advisor, whether or not the judge believes it, and is only permitted to take action with the president’s approval; that means that Trump is making the final decisions regarding USAID. The evidence Chuang cites doesn’t exist.

The judge also ruled that Musk needs the permission of an agency official, to continue his work; the president’s approval will not suffice:

DOGE and Musk are prohibited under the judge’s order from taking any other actions relating to USAID without the ‘express authorization’ of an agency official with legal authority to take the action. The Trump administration is likely to appeal the decision.

‘To deny plaintiffs’ Appointments Clause claim solely on the basis that, on paper, Musk has no formal legal authority relating to the decisions at issue, even if he is actually exercising significant authority on governmental matters, would open the door to an end-run around the Appointments Clause,’ Chuang wrote.

Chuang has decided that only an agency official can make the changes that the president is authorizing through Musk. Secondly, he’s decided that even though there has been no formal appointment of Musk to a position in the government, he must be trying to avoid the Appointments Clause. (Musk doesn’t even receive a salary.) The judge refuses to accept that President Trump ultimately has the authority to take these actions against USAID.

The most significant issue is that the judge won’t acknowledge the facts and is creating new “facts”: President Trump does have the authority to reduce the size of USAID regarding its agenda and regarding personnel, and he is authorizing Musk, who has advised him regarding steps to take, to implement those changes. Although Chuang assumes that other dastardly acts are taking place, his imagination doesn’t count as evidence.

When will these overreaches by activist judges be stopped?

Image: Public domain.