Musk's DOGE asks Supreme Court to shield it from transparency lawsuit

Driving the news: Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued in a Wednesday filing to the Supreme Court that DOGE should be exempted from the Freedom of Information Act because it is an advisory body and not a federal agency.

• A federal district court judge ruled in March that DOGE is likely subject to the sunshine law because it has "substantial independent authority" from the president — the legal test for determining whether FOIA applies.
• The watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington had sued DOGE, seeking records of its involvement in mass firings of federal workers.

What they're saying: The government in its request to the Supreme Court said the district court's ruling "turns FOIA on its head" because the judge ordered the requested documentation be produced before making a final determination on whether the open records law even applies in this instance.

• "And that order clearly violates the separation of powers, subjecting a presidential advisory body to intrusive discovery and threatening the confidentiality and candor of its advice, putatively to address a legal question that never should have necessitated discovery in this case at all."

• The government is asking the Supreme Court to halt the district court's order.

The other side: "While DOGE continues to attempt to fight transparency at every level of justice, we look forward to making our case that the Supreme Court should join the District Court and Court of Appeals in allowing discovery to go forward," CREW said in a statement emailed to Axios.

Editor's note: This story has been updated with a statement from CREW.