As Musk Reshapes The Government, Some Ask: Where Are The Guardrails?

In less than a month, Elon Musk’s U.S. DOGE Service has fired thousands of federal employees, frozen billions of dollars in funding, sifted through reams of private data and left many Americans with a simple question:

How could this happen?

The breakneck campaign to eviscerate the U.S. Agency for International Development, hobble the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and give young tech engineers access to sensitive computer systems — among them the trillion-dollar payment systems for the entire government — have left many inside and outside the civil service stunned.

Federal agencies have long been seen as lumbering, rule-bound bureaucracies built on strict chains of command, protocols and safeguards — systems that critics blame for stymieing reform, but which also protect vital social safety nets and national security by slowing or blocking quick change.

Until now.

The Musk-led cost-cutting commission and President Trump are seeking to challenge or circumvent some of the thousands of statutes that set the rules for government operations — rules contained in the 50-title Code of Federal Regulations. Experts in the civil service say the speed and scope of the change is an unprecedented challenge to these guardrails, many of which were never designed for this scenario. Although dozens of lawsuits have been brought against the administration’s actions to dismantle large swaths of the government, judges have issued mixed rulings and there may be limited avenues for employees to challenge decisions to oust them.

“We’re at a point where things are so unprecedented that it’s not even close to what was envisioned by any of the statutes that exist,” said Nick Bednar, a professor at the University of Minnesota Law School who specializes in the civil service. “We do have guardrails. But they assume moderately bad behavior. They don’t assume complete efforts to assault the traditional institutions of government.”

Musk and Trump officials have been able to crash through traditional legal buffers for several reasons.

Continue reading – FREE

Disclaimer

The information contained in South Florida Reporter is for general information purposes only.
The South Florida Reporter assumes no responsibility for errors or omissions in the contents of the Service.
In no event shall the South Florida Reporter be liable for any special, direct, indirect, consequential, or incidental damages or any damages whatsoever, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tort, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Service or the contents of the Service. The Company reserves the right to make additions, deletions, or modifications to the contents of the Service at any time without prior notice.
The Company does not warrant that the Service is free of viruses or other harmful components