Elon Musk Accused of Secrecy as He Skips Plaintiffs in Donald Trump DOGE Case

Elon Musk played a big role in helping the Trump administration during the first few months to rebuild and even strip down services in federal agencies across the government last year. The world’s richest man’s close association with Donald Trump and the role he played at the Department of Government Efficiency raised eyebrows.​

Musk’s legal adversaries can’t get him to reveal, under-oath, how he went about his designated position at the DOGE. According to a report by CNN, “Texas constables and others attempting to serve a plaintiff’s deposition request went to his various properties 14 times, only to be turned away or told Musk wasn’t there.”

The efforts to compel Musk to answer questions have time and again met with extreme difficulty. According to reports, a pretrial procedure, known as the discovery process, that offers both parties an opportunity to exchange evidence and identify witnesses, has been kept on hold for more than a year in a lawsuit challenging DOGE’s dismantling of federal agencies.

The Justice Department successfully appealed an order that requires Musk to answer written questions about his position. Despite parting ways with DOGE, government lawyers insist that Musk is not obliged to answer questions.

Reports suggest that DOGE has cost taxpayers money and a significant number of jobs while claiming that it spent government savings on the redevelopment of public institutions. The Justice Department awaits Supreme Court intervention to determine whether DOGE is covered by federal open records law.

Current and former US Agency for International Development staffers and contractors claim that Musk violated the Appointments Clause of the US Constitution. According to them, the Tesla CEO was the reason why the department went under.

​

In their lawsuit, USAID employees stated that “the impact of this unauthorized dismantling of USAID has had disastrous consequences for the American and global public, effectively paralyzing operations that delivered life‐saving aid.”

The clause under Supreme Court precedent requires officials who possess “significant authority,” Senate confirmation. The staffers seek disclosure from the government over whose decision led to the disbanding of the agency.

Court documents show that the attempts of serving Musk with a subpoena to pressure him into sitting for a deposition were all met with defiance. Over the span of three months, starting in mid‑November 2025, servers tried to meet with Musk. However, they faced repeated rejection.​

According to them, they were made to turn away from the entrance of gated properties, individuals speaking through a call box denied service saying they could not “provide any assistance or information.” There were instances where Musk’s staffers said no one by his name lived there. On several occasions, they even said that he was not home and that they were not allowed to receive documents on his behalf.

Andrew Warren, deputy legal director of Democracy Defenders Fund, which is representing the plaintiffs, revealed to CNN, ‘Elon Musk publicly bragged about destroying USAID, but he and the administration have retreated into secrecy now that their unconstitutional actions are being brought to light.”

​

“You can’t celebrate dismantling a government agency one day and hide the receipts the next.”

The severe effects of the DOGE cuts have triggered several lawsuits. For example, at the Environmental Protection Agency, which suffered a 30% decrease in staffing, environmental advocates say ‘the cuts have left some communities with fewer tools to monitor pollution or hold industrial actors accountable.”

Andrew Whelan, director of community strategy for the group, told CNN that there are communities that have no way of knowing what actions to take to protect their families’ health.

The question of whether or not Elon Musk will be compelled to answer questions about his authority over the federal agency remains.