White House states that Elon Musk is not in charge of DOGE in recent submission

WASHINGTON — As its influence within the federal government grows daily, one question routinely emerges about the Department of Government Efficiency: Who is in charge?

That answer continues to evade the lawyers tasked with defending President Donald Trump’s administration in court.

In an affidavit filed in federal court on Tuesday, a White House official clarified that Elon Musk is not the administrator of the newly formed entity — seemingly contradicting public statements by Trump. Since announcing DOGE in December 2024, he has routinely referred to Musk as its leader.

However, according to Office of Administration Director Joshua Fischer, Musk is a “non career special government employee” who serves as a senior adviser to the president. The filing compared Musk’s role to that of Anita Dunn, a longtime political advisor who served as a senior adviser to President Joe Biden.

The filing did not provide any information about who oversees DOGE, other than ruling out Musk.

The filing comes after Judge Tanya Chutkan – who held a hearing Monday in a case that challenges the breadth of Musk’s authority – raised concerns about the “unpredictable and scattershot” methods employed by DOGE.

“DOGE appears to be moving in no sort of predictable and orderly fashion,” Chutkan said. “This is essentially a private citizen directing an organization that’s not a federal agency to have access to the entire workings of the federal government, fire, hire, slash, contract, terminate programs, all without apparently any congressional oversight.”

Federal judges are similarly wresting with how to define DOGE within government. In an order issued late Friday, a federal judge in Washington, DC ruled that DOGE should be considered an “agency” though he noted how the Trump administration is “curiously” avoiding that label.

“This appears to come from a desire to escape the obligations that accompany agencyhood – such as being subject to the Freedom of Information Act, the Privacy Act and the Administrative Procedures Act — while reaping only its benefits,” U.S. District Judge John Bates wrote.