Politics
Musk’s Team Must Produce Documents to Comply With Open Records Laws, Judge Says
A federal judge found on Monday that Elon Musk’s government-cutting unit is likely subject to public disclosure laws and must promptly turn over documents to a group that had sued for access to its internal emails.
In his order, Judge Christopher R. Cooper of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia wrote that the Department of Government Efficiency Mr. Musk leads had all the hallmarks of an agency that would typically be subject to laws like the Freedom of Information Act. He said Mr. Musk’s team appeared to be exercising “substantial authority over vast swathes of the federal government,” much greater than other federal agencies that are subject to the law.
Judge Cooper required both Mr. Musk’s team and the Office of Management and Budget to turn over email correspondence between their offices that the group suing had requested, and to “begin producing documents on a rolling basis as soon as practicable.”
The lawsuit, brought by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, or CREW, had asked the court to compel those agencies to turn those records over by Monday, a time frame the judge said was unrealistic. It had argued that the group’s internal records were of extreme interest to the public as Mr. Musk and his associates have planned cuts and layoffs largely in secret while laying waste to vast sections of the federal government.
The group’s lawyers had also expressed alarm about reports that members of Mr. Musk’s team had deleted or failed to preserve encrypted text messages on platforms like Signal and emails sent from personal accounts, in what it described as violations of other federal regulations set by the National Archives and Records Administration.
In his ruling, Judge Cooper noted those concerns, writing that “this evidence gives rise to the possibility that representatives of the defendant entities may not fully appreciate their obligations to preserve federal records.”
Donald K. Sherman, the deputy director of CREW, said in an interview that the court decision “opens the door” for the public to obtain documents from Mr. Musk’s government-cutting initiative that would help it understand how it is operating.
“This is the first court to find that DOGE is subject to the Freedom of Information Act,” Mr. Sherman said. “It would hopefully provide some measure of accountability for the reckless and chaotic way that DOGE has been operating.”
A White House spokesman did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The Trump administration has argued that as part of the executive branch, Mr. Musk’s office, which was formed as a temporary advisory unit, was not subject to the Freedom of Information Act. It has also taken actions to try to insulate it from public records requests or judicial intervention.
At a hearing on Friday, Jonathan Maier, a lawyer for CREW, called Mr. Musk’s unit a “black box agency that’s designed and dedicated to drastically cutting federal spending at virtually any cost.”
“We’re kind of grasping at straws here, without information,” he said. “DOGE, in its conception, is a fast-moving, essentially, agent of chaos that’s affecting government functions throughout the executive branch.”
Mr. Maier argued that the request was urgent, pointing to proposals by Senate Republicans to formally adopt cuts that the Department of Government Efficiency has ordered through the rescission process, by which a president can request that Congress cancel certain funds lawmakers have appropriated.
He said that understanding what programs may have been targeted by Mr. Musk’s team depended on the public’s ability to pierce the veil of secrecy surrounding the goals and processes Mr. Musk and his associates have adopted.
“We’re barreling toward either a government shutdown or a last-minute spending bill by March 14,” he said. Using an abbreviation for U.S. DOGE Service, he added, “Viability, in terms of that bill — and from the mouths of the appropriators themselves — turns on Congress’s ability to get details on how the new U.S.D.S. operates, and whether it’s poised to prevent, at its option, appropriated funds from being spent.”
Andrew Bernie, a lawyer for the government, said on Friday that it could take the government three years to produce the all documents requested, even on an expedited basis.
During arguments on Friday, Judge Cooper pressed lawyers for CREW to explain how Mr. Musk’s team differed from a lobbying firm or other outside actors that might look to influence Congress’s appropriations process with recommended cuts.
“Those outside influences don’t have the weight of the federal government and the White House behind them,” Mr. Maier said.
Even before issuing the opinion, Judge Cooper told lawyers for the government on Friday to advise the two offices to begin preserving documents that could be subject to the Freedom of Information Act under his coming order.
In February, the White House tried to designate Mr. Musk’s office as an entity insulated from public records requests or most judicial intervention until at least 2034, by declaring the documents it produces and receives presidential records.
That designation has a special legal meaning under a law called the Presidential Records Act. The law shields from the public all documents, communication trails and records from the president, his advisers and staff until five years after that president leaves office. The federal courts have ruled that White House entities that merely advise and assist the president are not subject to the Freedom of Information Act.
When CREW filed a public records request law under the law, DOGE denied the filing, claiming that it is not an agency but a presidential records entity exempted from the open records law.
But Judge Cooper found it more likely that Mr. Musk’s team has acted as an agency conducting its own operations than as a mere advisory entity to the president.
President Trump’s executive order establishing Mr. Musk’s office gave it “a defined staff,” Judge Cooper wrote, adding that it “is likely exercising substantial independent authority.”
Politics
FBI arrests protester who threatened to kill ICE officer’s family at NJ detention center protest, Blanche says
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Acting US Attorney General Todd Blanche on Friday said that a man who made death threats against a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer and his family at a protest in New Jersey Thursday night had been arrested.
The arrest came just hours after Blanche promised the protester, who was captured on video, would be found and arrested.
“That’s a federal crime,” Blanche said on Fox News’ “The Will Cain Show” on Thursday. “Not only threatening the ICE officer — but think about how disgusting this individual is by threatening his wife and his children with death.
In the video, the protester can be heard taunting the officer: “I will kill your whole f—ing family. Your whole f—ing family is dead. Your children and wife all dead. I have your face mother—er! All dead!”
ANTI-ICE AGITATOR SCREAMS ‘I’LL KILL YOUR WHOLE F- FAMILY’ DAY AFTER DEM GOV PRAISES ‘PEACEFUL PROTESTING’
Federal immigration officers clashed with protesters outside Delaney Hall in Newark, N.J., on Thursday. (Mostafa Bassim/Anadolu)
Blanche said the officer was just doing his job and “standing there.”
On Friday evening, Blanche wrote on X: Told you. @FBI just arrested the man who threatened to kill ICE officers and their families. FAFO.”
He has not yet been identified.
ANTI-ICE PROTESTERS CLASH WITH AGENTS OUTSIDE NEW JERSEY DETENTION CENTER AS GOV. SHERRILL DENIED ENTRY
The clash occurred Thursday evening outside of Newark’s Delaney Hall detention center where protesters were accused of biting, kicking and punching agents.
The protests were in their sixth night by Thursday. (Mostafa Bassim/Anadolu)
Agents responded by deploying pepper spray and beating back agitators as the protest continued into its sixth night.
Nine rioters were arrested during the clashes Thursday, the Department of Homeland Security told Fox News Digital.
ANTI-ICE AGITATORS THROW WOODEN PALLETS, MATTRESSES AT FEDERAL AGENTS DURING CHAOTIC NJ DETENTION CENTER CLASH
Approximately 100 protesters mobbed the area surrounding the detention center, chanting “F— ICE” and brandishing black umbrellas, gas masks and other gear to protect themselves from pepper spray and various anti-riot measures.
On Wednesday evening, DHS reported that approximately 100 anti-ICE protesters gathered around the Delaney Hall ICE facility. While rioters assaulted and threw objects at law enforcement, DHS said “local police refused to help our officers.” Six rioters were arrested Wednesday night for allegedly assaulting law enforcement officers.
ICE agents use chemical irritants during clashes with protestors outside the federal immigration center at Delaney Hall in Newark, N.J., on Thursday. (Adam Gray/Getty Images)
“We called local police, we called state police multiple times. Listen, I know the law enforcement there would love to respond, but because of Governor Sherrill’s behavior what the governor is doing, she’s not allowing public officers and state officers to respond,” Mullin said during a Thursday morning appearance on Fox & Friends.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Demonstrations over conditions for detainees began Friday, May 22, after detainees penned an open letter claiming they were being denied access to medical care, being insufficiently fed and detained without due process.
DHS has denied those claims.
Fox News’ Charles Creitz and Robert McGreevy contributed to this report.
With California facing increasingly destructive wildfires, experts and officials have long urged the strategic removal of dense, flammable vegetation that can erupt into particularly destructive flames from a lightning bolt or the spark of a power line.
But after years of record investment by the state in such wildfire risk mitigation, two key money sources are drying up, potentially reducing the state’s annual budget for vegetation removal by hundreds of millions of dollars.
Wildfire resiliency advocates are warning that the loss of these funds will leave the state vulnerable to devastation, and are calling on California’s next governor to take that threat seriously.
Currently, California relies heavily on two funding sources for wildfire mitigation work: A state program that charges polluters for their emissions and a climate bond approved by voters in 2024.
Late Friday, however, state officials adopted a new structure for the emissions program, called cap-and-invest, that analysts say will likely reduce wildfire mitigation funding by $200 million per year. At the same time, the governor’s latest budget proposal puts the state on track to allocate the majority of the climate bond’s $1.5 billion in wildfire prevention money within just three years.
As a result, California could go from routinely pulling more than $600 million a year from these sources, to just $150 million, according to an estimate from the Wildfire Solutions Coalition — a group of more than 80 organizations representing conservationists, business owners, fire officials and tribal leaders.
The coalition is urging the state to find new sources of funding for the work.
“We have the scientists, we have the technicians, we have the advocates,” said Michelle Decker, who is on the coalition’s executive committee and serves as president and CEO of the Inland Empire Community Foundation. “We see this problem. We can get ahead of this problem. It is a revenue issue.”
California wildfires have become increasingly costly. The 2025 L.A. fires alone caused an estimated $250 billion in damage and economic loss. Insurance companies have already paid out $22.4 billion.
In attempt to reduce the risk of damage to communities and ecosystems, the state has employed a wide range of tactics. These includes fortifying homes against wildfires, replanting fire-ravaged forests and thinning out vegetation with prescribed burns, goat grazing and manual thinning with heavy machinery to reduce the intensity of potential fires.
Research suggests wildfire mitigation work pays off. A recent analysis of 285 fires in the western U.S. found that every dollar spent on landscape projects saved about $3.75 in wildfire damage.
But as funding from cap-and-invest and the climate bond dwindle, the state must increasingly turn to Cal Fire, which devotes only a small portion of its budget to mitigation work.
“This is not an issue that can be pushed off to a timeline based solely on politics,” said Steve Frisch, a founding member of the coalition and president of the Sierra Business Council. “Fire happens whether we want it to or not.”
After a series of destructive wildfires in Northern California and the 2017 Thomas fire in Southern California, the state legislature began to explicitly focus on funding wildfire mitigation.
In 2018, lawmakers directed $200 million per year of cap-and-invest funds to wildfire mitigation projects.
As the Woolsey fire in Southern California and the Camp fire in Paradise raged later that fall, Trump accused the state of “gross mismanagement” of forest lands and threatened to cut off federal funds unless it was corrected.
Gov. Gavin Newsom and the legislature, with a significant budget surplus, began earmarking even more funds, leading to a peak of $1.1 billion in wildfire mitigation investments during the 2021-2022 fiscal year.
After the surplus dwindled, the legislature opted in 2024 to put a $10-billion climate bond in front of voters — $1.5 billion of which was dedicated specifically for wildfire mitigation work.
Newsom has since pointed to this high state funding to call on the federal government to step up its own investments into forest management work.
The federal government manages 57% of all forests in the state. While the U.S. Forest Service spent $3.1 billion mitigating wildfire conditions in the state over the last few years, California spent $4.3 billion, according to the California Forest Resilience and Wildfire Task Force.
However, the state has already allocated about $600 million of the climate bond’s wildfire mitigation pot for the 2024-2025 and current fiscal years. The latest budget proposal would allocate more than $300 million for this upcoming fiscal year. While many advocates support allocating the money quickly, it leaves little for future years.
Once that money is spent, California has to pay off the $10 billion bond with interest. The result is an estimated price tag of $16 billion, paid in roughly $400 million increments every year, for 40 years, according to the state’s Legislative Analyst’s Office.
As for the cap-and-invest funds, a fraught months-long debate at the California Air Resources Board on how to extend the program beyond 2030 resulted in a compromise that will cut the revenue it generates in half, the Legislative Analyst’s Office estimates.
Since other projects get priority — including $1 billion every year for California’s high-speed rail project — the new proposal would “likely leave no funding” for the wildfire and forest resilience line item, the Legislative Analyst’s Office found.
Cal Fire still holds a modest annual budget for wildfire mitigation work. In the 2024-2025 fiscal year, the agency had $500 million for forest management and fire prevention that was not directly tied to cap-and-invest or the bond — up from about $65 million two decades prior.
As for the federal government, independent analyses by Grassroots Wildland Firefighters and NPR found that Forest Service wildfire mitigation work is on the decline amid federal staffing cuts. The Forest Service claims the decrease in work was primarily due to poor weather conditions for activities like prescribed burns and staff being occupied with firefighting.
Both the state and federal government’s investments pale in comparison to the spending of California’s investor-owned utilities. In 2025 alone, the utilities planned to spend more than $9.2 billion on preventing their equipment from sparking the next devastating wildfire, primarily funded by Californians’ electricity bills.
Times staff writer Hayley Smith contributed to this report.
By Zolan Kanno-Youngs, Gilad Thaler, Jon Miller, Stephanie Swart, Rafaela Balster, Whitney Shefte and Nikolay Nikolov
May 29, 2026
-
Nevada1 minute agoNevada State Police investigating deadly crash on U.S. 95 Alternate
-
New Hampshire4 minutes agoOpinion: The farm bill passed the House. Western New Hampshire got the bill. – Concord Monitor
-
New Jersey9 minutes agoPolice fire tear gas during protest outside New Jersey ICE facility
-
New Mexico16 minutes agoPatrick Brenner: New Mexico can’t afford permitting paralysis | Carlsbad Current Argus
-
North Carolina19 minutes agoNorth Carolina felon gets 22 years for 15 guns, fentanyl pills, meth and cocaine
-
North Dakota24 minutes agoHow popular is mail-in and absentee voting in North Dakota?
-
Ohio31 minutes agoOhio voters literally can’t believe our eyes. Danger of AI ads not overblown | Letters
-
Oklahoma34 minutes agoOklahoma’s dramatic literacy goals now up to elementary schools to implement
