Previous post
We knew the lawfare would continue, but I sure didn’t have foresight to predict how blatant it would be. Yesterday morning, we found out that a federal judge blocked the Treasury AND the incoming Secretary of the Treasury, Scott Bessent from DOGE.
Politico, who has it’s own problems right now via DOGE findings at USAID, offered this report.
A federal judge on Saturday issued a sweeping block on most Trump administration officials — including Elon Musk and his allies — from accessing sensitive Treasury records for at least a week while legal proceedings play out in New York.
Manhattan-based U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer issued the middle-of-the-night order after an emergency request by 19 Democratic attorneys general warning that the efforts by Musk’s so-called Department of Government Efficiency allies to take control of Treasury’s sensitive payment systems — which have access to personal information of millions of Americans and the government’s financial transactions — were putting their residents at risk.
And everyone who is aghast at finding out how wasteful our government was thrilled at this news. DOGE won’t have access to our PII (personal information)! The identities of everyone who pays taxes or works at Treasury has been saved and protected forevermore!
And then people started digging into Judge Paul Englemayer’s ruling. And discovered that, along with attorneys general from Oregon, CO, New York, MA, NJ, and more, this was blatant lawfare. Read this from the ruling:
(ii) restrained from granting access to all political appointees, special government employees, and government employees detailed from an agency outside the Treasury Department, to any Treasury Department payment record, payment systems, or any other data systems maintained by the Treasury Department containing personally identifiable information and/or confidential financial information of payees; and (iii) ordered to direct any person prohibited above from having access to such information, records and systems but who has had access to such information, records, and systems since January 20, 2025, to immediately destroy any and all copies of material downloaded from the Treasury Department’s records and systems, if any;
Now who would the political appointee be? Under Article II of the United States Constitution, the President has the power to appoint someone to run the Department of Treasury. The Senate consented. Therefore, this judge truly does NOT have the power to block Scott Bessent from doing his job.
Furthemore, we are now finding out that how the judge GOT to this ruling is highly suspicious. For example, this hearing was held ex parte. Which means that A. Only the Democrat attorneys general were in the room to make their case. B. The Trump Administration attorneys were NOT notified and C. Therefore had no opportunity to make THEIR case. Which leads to a predetermined outcome doesn’t it?
“The Court’s firm assessment is that, for the reasons stated by the States, they will face irreparable harm in the absence of injunctive relief,” Engelmayer wrote in his decision.
“That is both because of the risk that the new policy presents of the disclosure of sensitive and confidential information and the heightened risk that the systems in question will be more vulnerable than before to hacking,” the judge continued.
The state attorneys general had only filed their case on Friday before Engelmayer’s decison came down early Saturday.
Read that again. The judge only had the 60-page case in front of him for mere hours. He then heard arguments from some or all the attorneys general. And was able to rule after that? Yet list exactly ZERO legal precedents justifying his decision?
As Charlie Kirk notes here, this ruling essentially claims that the Secretary of Treasury is only a “ceremonial position.”
Most notably the Take-Care Clause, Opinions-in-Writing Clause, and Appointments Clause, which create a clear chain of command from POTUS to principal officers to inferior officers. Now principal officers like Bessent can neither fully inform POTUS nor direct subordinates
— Trent McCotter (@TrentMcCotter) February 8, 2025
Again, this is blatant lawfare with zero basis in Constitutional law. The fact that this judge, Paul Engelmayer issued a ruling with zero Constitutional legal precedent. As this attorney points out here (and I’d encourage you to read the entire thread), Judge Engelmayer issued this ruling based upon what “MIGHT” happen. In other words, no actual harm has been caused, we just need to stop DOGE and the Treasury because we “think” injury or harm “could” happen.
Ultimately this case is political. The best argument they have is count 2 but I think that one is debatable as well. The fact that a court issued a TRO without an opportunity to respond on this seems extremely political. Further, I’d love to know how this Judge would justify this…
— Tom Renz (@RenzTom) February 8, 2025
Keep in mind, one of the rationales for this move is to prevent people from gaining access to sensitive Treasury information. Given that the Chinese have hacked into the Treasury multiple times throughout the last decade, having folks come in to audit the system and also possibly identify vulnerabilities that gave the Chinese access is a good thing in my opinion!
When Elon and his DOGE team have already identified potential fraud of up to $1 billion a year at Treasury…
To be clear, what the @DOGE team and @USTreasury have jointly agreed makes sense is the following:
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 8, 2025
– Require that all outgoing government payments have a payment categorization code, which is necessary in order to pass financial audits. This is frequently left blank, making…
Should the judge be impeached? Many, including Elon Musk, think so. Should Treasury Sec Bessent, Trump, and DOGE ignore the judge’s ruling? Many including JD Vance think so. Besides, Democrats created this slippery slope.
I don't know. What happened when Biden ignored the court rulings and moved ahead with student loan scheme?
— Stephen L. Miller (@redsteeze) February 9, 2025
You guys are getting a lesson in living with the slippery slopes you created. https://t.co/rD0PBDxAJ4
One wonders what else we will uncover and what it is that Democrats don’t want us to find out? Why else would they engage in such blatant lawfare, thus creating more skepticism and mistrust of our judicial system?
Feature Photo Credit: Adobe Stock standard license, cropped
Cameron says: I think the judge and the Democrat lawyers involved in this are in for an ugly surprise.
Darleen Click says: From your lips to God’s ear.
Whitehall says: The Chief Justice is supposedly required to maintain good order amongst subordinate Federal judges as the head of judicial branch administration.
Has he no power slap down such out-of-bounds behavior? Is the NO discipline in the Federal courts other than impeachment, trial, and removal?
The Nation calls out to you, John Roberts!
This looks like a panicked coverup reaction. When access is restored to DOGE, they need to make a list of the relations and associates of this “judge” – and look for any payments to them or the judge (other than his judicial salary).
GWB says: will be more vulnerable than before to hacking
You mean the systems that were already hacked?
restrained from granting access to all political appointees, special government employees, and government employees detailed from an agency outside the Treasury Department
There’s only one truly safe way to do that (I’m cybersecutiy competent): SHUT DOWN ALL THE SERVERS. Period. Pull the plug.
But, I do agree they should not only ignore the TRO, but publically call the judge on the carpet (and appeal directly to SCOTUS, since state AGs are involved). And, yes, if they do comply, do so maliciously: Treasury has to sign every check that goes out; so no checks will go out since I can’t see the data; and that includes Judicial branch payments. And Congress needs to impeach this black-robed tyrant.
5 Comments