The article discusses a petition by several states asserting that Elon Musk has been granted excessive and unauthorized authority over federal agencies by President Trump, undermining the separation of powers. The states argue that discovery is unnecessary, as their claims regarding the Appointments Clause can be settled based on the plaintiffs' complaint alone. They suggest that without proper accountability, Musk has transformed his role into one of chaos, impacting federal decision-making. They emphasize that only the defendants hold critical information to support their claims and mitigate further harm.
The plaintiffs argue that Mr. Musk has been granted unchecked authority by President Trump, undermining legal norms and jeopardizing the separation of powers.
Discovery is not necessary, as the plaintiffs' claims regarding the Appointments Clause can be resolved based on their complaint without further evidence.
Only the defendants have the potential documents that the plaintiffs need to verify claims and seek relief from perceived agency misconduct.
The plaintiffs claim their allegations present pure legal questions that should not require a lengthy discovery process for resolution.
Collection
[
|
...
]