-(4)-1731951738-q80.webp){kind=small}
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) sharply criticized Elon Musk’s recent actions in restructuring the federal government, calling them “illegal and unconstitutional.”
Speaking on CNN’s Anderson Cooper 360 on Wednesday, Sanders acknowledged the need to reduce government waste but argued that Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) had overstepped legal and constitutional boundaries.
“Nothing wrong with looking for waste in the kinds of bureaucracy that exist. I think we can do a whole lot to get rid of the waste, the fraud, the excessive bureaucracy that exists in government — especially, by the way, in the Defense Department,” Sanders said.
“What is wrong right now is one simple reality: What Musk is doing is illegal and unconstitutional.”
Musk’s team at DOGE has implemented sweeping changes across multiple federal agencies in the early weeks of President Trump’s administration. Critics have raised legal concerns about these moves, particularly DOGE’s influence over executive agencies that operate under congressional authority.
One of Musk’s most controversial actions was locking federal workers out of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). Congress funds USAID annually through appropriations bills under the State Department and foreign operations budget.
The abrupt decision to restrict employees’ access to agency buildings and resources has raised alarms about whether Musk has the legal authority to intervene in a congressionally mandated institution.
Additionally, Musk’s influence has extended into the Treasury Department, where his team gained access to the federal payment system.
Under DOGE’s guidance, many federal employees have been offered buyouts, further signaling a dramatic shift in government operations. Sanders condemned these actions as blatant overreach.
“You cannot go into an agency like USAID and essentially fire everybody and get rid of that agency,” Sanders said. “That’s an agency that was created by Congress.”
The senator argued that if Musk and the Trump administration wanted to eliminate USAID, they needed to go through the proper legislative channels.
“They want to get rid of USAID? Fine. Come to the Congress. Make your case,” Sanders said. “You can’t do it unilaterally.”
Musk’s involvement in government restructuring has fueled concerns about corporate influence over public institutions. Sanders has long criticized the role of billionaires in politics and used Musk’s case as further evidence that the U.S. government is increasingly controlled by the ultra-wealthy.
During the interview, Sanders pointed to Musk’s substantial financial contributions to Trump’s 2024 re-election campaign. The billionaire reportedly spent over $200 million to support Trump’s bid for a second term.
Since Trump’s inauguration, Musk’s net worth has increased by more than $150 million, adding to concerns that his role in the government is serving personal financial interests rather than public welfare.
“You tell me whether or not we are living in an oligarchy,” Sanders said. “And I think the function of government under Trump, under Elon Musk, will not be to serve ordinary people, but to make the very richest people in this country even richer.”
The growing tension between Musk’s government involvement and congressional oversight has led to bipartisan scrutiny.
While some Republicans have supported DOGE’s mission to streamline federal operations, others have expressed concerns about the unprecedented level of control Musk has exerted over critical agencies.
Democrats have pushed for increased transparency regarding DOGE’s decision-making process. Several lawmakers have called for congressional hearings to examine Musk’s actions, particularly his team’s role in restricting USAID’s operations and accessing Treasury financial systems.
There are also discussions about introducing legislation to prevent private sector figures from exerting excessive influence over executive agencies.
Despite the criticism, Musk has defended his role in the federal government, arguing that DOGE’s actions are necessary to eliminate waste and modernize inefficient agencies.
Supporters of DOGE claim that Musk’s approach has already reduced unnecessary expenditures and streamlined bureaucratic processes. However, opponents argue that the lack of congressional approval makes his actions a violation of democratic principles.
As legal and political challenges to DOGE’s authority mount, the future of Musk’s influence in the federal government remains uncertain.
Sanders and other lawmakers continue to push back against what they view as a dangerous shift toward corporate control over public institutions.
The coming months are likely to see intensified debate over the balance between government efficiency and constitutional governance.
With Musk’s actions now under intense congressional and legal scrutiny, the battle over DOGE’s role in government restructuring is far from over. The question remains whether Musk’s drastic changes will withstand legal challenges or if Congress will move to limit his authority.
