In a landmark decision on Friday, a federal appeals court ruled in favor of Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), allowing them to continue efforts to dismantle the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). The ruling by a three-judge panel of the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned an earlier injunction imposed by U.S. District Judge Theodore Chuang, which had temporarily blocked Musk and his team from making cuts to USAID.
The court’s decision comes as the Trump administration ramps up its final push to eliminate USAID, an agency responsible for distributing foreign aid. On Friday morning, the State Department officially notified Congress of its plans to disband USAID, according to statements from Democratic lawmakers. Additionally, a memo from a deputy USAID administrator, who also serves as a member of DOGE, announced that most of the agency’s employees would lose their jobs on either July 1 or September 2.
Chuang, an Obama-appointed judge based in Maryland, had previously ruled that Musk and his allies within DOGE were likely violating constitutional limits on executive power because Musk had not been formally appointed to a Senate-confirmed position. However, all three judges on the appeals court panel agreed to lift Chuang’s injunction, though their reasoning differed.
Judge Marvin Quattlebaum, a Trump appointee, wrote the lead opinion, arguing that Musk’s actions were legally sound because he was serving as a valid presidential adviser. Quattlebaum emphasized that Musk’s moves to shutter USAID had been approved by officials with direct authority over the agency.
“The administration presented evidence that in all pertinent actions, Musk acted as a Senior Advisor to the President and not as the Administrator of DOGE, and that all decisions pertaining to USAID were either made or approved by those so authorized,” Quattlebaum wrote. His opinion was joined by Judge Paul Niemeyer, a George H.W. Bush appointee.
Judge Roger Gregory, a Bill Clinton appointee, concurred with the outcome but offered a scathing critique of Musk’s role in the process. Gregory argued that Musk had likely violated the Constitution’s Appointments Clause and that shutting down USAID likely contradicts congressional intent. However, he contended that Musk and DOGE were not the correct defendants in the case, as the lawsuit should have targeted officials with formal authority over the agency.
“We may never know how many lives will be lost or cut short by the Defendants’ decision to abruptly cancel billions of dollars in congressionally appropriated foreign aid,” Gregory wrote. “We may never know the lasting effect of Defendants’ actions on our national aspirations and goals. But those are not the questions before the Court today.”
The appeals court decision paves the way for the Trump administration to fulfill one of its long-standing objectives: halting foreign aid and shutting down the agency responsible for implementing it. USAID has historically played a key role in providing humanitarian assistance, promoting economic development, and supporting global stability. The move to eliminate the agency has drawn fierce opposition from lawmakers, foreign policy experts, and humanitarian organizations.
The legal battle over USAID’s future is far from over. The plaintiffs in the case, consisting of USAID employees and contractors, have the option to appeal the 4th Circuit ruling to the Supreme Court. Meanwhile, additional lawsuits challenging specific cuts to USAID funding remain active in other courts across the country.
Democratic lawmakers and advocacy groups also vowed to continue their fight. “This decision is devastating not just for the thousands of USAID employees who have dedicated their lives to public service, but also for the millions of people around the world who rely on U.S. foreign aid,” said Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-MD). “We will not stand by and allow this reckless dismantling of a critical agency to proceed unchecked.”
The dismantling of USAID represents a dramatic shift in U.S. foreign policy. Since its establishment in 1961, the agency has been a cornerstone of American diplomacy, providing assistance in regions facing poverty, conflict, and natural disasters. Experts warn that the agency’s closure could erode U.S. influence abroad and create a vacuum that adversarial nations, such as China and Russia, could exploit.
Former USAID Administrator Mark Green criticized the decision, warning that it could have long-term consequences for national security. “Foreign aid is not just charity—it’s a strategic investment in global stability. By withdrawing from these efforts, the U.S. risks ceding leadership in crucial regions,” Green said.
Elon Musk’s involvement in government efficiency reforms has been a point of controversy since he was tapped by the Trump administration to oversee efforts to streamline federal agencies. DOGE, the newly created Department of Government Efficiency, has aggressively pursued cost-cutting measures, including the elimination of programs deemed inefficient. Critics argue that the department, under Musk’s influence, has overstepped its authority and is operating outside constitutional norms.
Musk, for his part, has defended the effort as necessary to rein in government waste. “USAID has been a bloated, ineffective bureaucracy for decades,” Musk said in a social media post following the ruling. “We need to focus on America first, not waste billions overseas.”
The appeals court ruling clears a major obstacle for the Trump administration, but the battle over USAID is likely to continue. Opponents of the shutdown are expected to explore further legal challenges, legislative action, and public advocacy to save the agency. Meanwhile, USAID employees face an uncertain future as job cuts loom in the coming months.
