The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), a project spearheaded by Elon Musk to reshape federal programs and regulations, faces a lawsuit alleging violations of federal transparency laws. The legal action was filed just moments after President Donald Trump’s inauguration.

The 30-page complaint, obtained by The Washington Post, argues that DOGE, operating as a non-governmental advisory entity to the White House, is breaking provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA).

Passed in 1972, FACA mandates that federal advisory committees maintain balanced representation, file a charter with Congress, disclose records of meetings, and ensure transparency in their operations.

According to the lawsuit, DOGE qualifies as a federal advisory committee under FACA but has failed to comply with these requirements.

The complaint contends that DOGE’s reports “do not presently reflect the views of a lawfully constituted advisory committee” and demands that the organization adhere to FACA guidelines before its recommendations are implemented by the White House.

DOGE, which has already recruited dozens of staff members and deployed representatives to federal agencies to identify programs for potential cuts, has yet to meet FACA’s transparency requirements.

The group’s funding remains ambiguous, with Trump’s advisors reportedly considering private donations from top contributors or seeking congressional earmarks ranging from $30 million to $50 million.

Kel McClanahan, executive director of National Security Counselors and the author of the lawsuit, stated, “DOGE is not exempted from FACA’s requirements. All meetings of DOGE, including those conducted through an electronic medium, must be open to the public.”

The lawsuit also alleges that DOGE is violating the requirement for balanced representation by excluding federal workers from its ranks.

Two plaintiffs reportedly applied to join DOGE to advocate for federal employees but were ignored, further fueling claims of imbalance in its advisory framework.

National Security Counselors, the organization behind the legal challenge, argues that DOGE’s operations are neither transparent nor representative.

The plaintiffs insist that any recommendations produced by DOGE must comply with federal standards for advisory committees to ensure ethical and impartial advice.

DOGE’s defenders may point to historical precedent in their legal fight. Courts have previously ruled in favor of exempting certain entities from FACA requirements.

For example, in 1987, the Supreme Court decided that the American Bar Association was exempt from FACA despite its role in advising the president on judicial nominations.

Conversely, the court has also applied FACA regulations to other advisory panels, including those focused on nuclear waste and cleanup, as seen in 2002 rulings.

The lawsuit marks the first significant legal challenge to DOGE’s operations, raising broader questions about transparency, accountability, and the role of private influence in government policymaking.

As DOGE begins to shape Trump’s austerity agenda, the court’s decision will likely set a significant precedent for how advisory committees operate under federal law.

The White House and DOGE representatives have not yet commented on the lawsuit.

The case is expected to draw attention as it moves through the judicial system, with implications for advisory committees and their obligations to adhere to transparency and ethical standards.