A federal judge has denied a ‘final’ request to block Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from accessing government data amid cost-cutting auditing efforts.

Despite not being an official government department, DOGE – spearheaded by Musk, the richest man in the world – has been tasked with drastically reducing the federal workforce and cutting any US tax spending that seems unnecessary.

Over the last few weeks, the advisory body has vowed to minimize the US national debt, which stands at $36tn.

It has also terminated various federal contracts, canceled Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs, and implemented sweeping cuts at the United States Agency for International Development (USAID).

Various Democratic states have rallied together to hamper these cost-cutting efforts, appealing for a temporary restraining order to be put in place.

The lawsuit, brought to Congress, sought to bar DOGE from accessing information systems or firing employees in various government departments, such as Energy, Transportation and Commerce.

The states also wanted those working in Labor, Office of Personnel Management, Health and Human Services and Education to be marked safe from a potential cull.

Other DOGE acts cited in the suit include ‘accessing sensitive and confidential agency data’ as well as cancelling federal contracts.

However, U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan claimed on Tuesday (February 18) that the ‘possibility’ that DOGE could harm the country through accessing data systems or making decisions regarding personnel was ‘not enough’ to halt its activities.

DOGE’s cost-cutting efforts are spearheaded by Elon Musk (Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

“The court is aware that DOGE’s unpredictable actions have resulted in considerable uncertainty and confusion for Plaintiffs and many of their agencies and residents,” Chutkan wrote, as per NBC News.

“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.

“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.”

Chutkan noted that the Plaintiffs – led by New Mexico – had not met the ‘high standard for irreparable injury’ and that the states had not shown why they were entitled to an immediate restraining order, as per Reuters.

“The court is aware that DOGE’s unpredictable actions have resulted in considerable uncertainty and confusion for Plaintiffs and many of their agencies and residents,” she continued.

“When litigants have identified specific individuals or programs imminently targeted by Defendants, courts have issued appropriately tailored [temporary restraining orders].”

Following the ruling, New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez said that he will pursue litigation against Musk and DOGE for ‘as long as it takes to bring this chaos to an end’.

The New York Post reports that Torrez claimed that although he was ‘disappointed’ that the court had failed to issue a temporary restraining order, he will continue rallying for Musk’s ‘unlawful power grab’ to cease.

A New Mexico representative hoped to end Musk’s ‘unlawful power grab’ with the lawsuit (Kevin Lamarque – Pool/Getty Images)

“Every day that he is allowed to operate without a congressional mandate and with little apparent supervision, Musk is destabilizing our government and disrupting critical funding for education, public health and national security,” the specialist continued.

“His move fast and break things mentality is not only reckless, but also unconstitutional, and we are prepared to pursue this case for as long as it takes to bring this chaos to an end.”

Following the ‘final attempt to stop’ Musk, Chutkan has asked that the Democratic states proposing the block file a proposed briefing schedule by 5pm today (February 19) if they intend to move for a preliminary injunction.