Fourth Circuit Delivers Major Win for Trump, Elon Musk, and DOGE: USAID Shutdown Back on Track
The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals dealt a stinging rebuke to the left’s legal resistance on Friday, granting an emergency stay that clears the way for President Trump’s administration—and Senior Advisor Elon Musk—to continue dismantling the United States Agency for International Development (USAID).
This decision comes just days after Obama-appointed District Judge Theodore Chuang attempted to block the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from executing its plan to streamline the federal government, declaring the USAID shutdown “likely unconstitutional.” But the appellate court wasn’t buying it.
The Background: Lawfare Meets Bureaucratic Panic
Judge Chuang’s March 18 ruling, based on a lawsuit filed by 26 anonymous USAID employees, temporarily halted the Trump administration’s effort to shut down an agency widely seen as bloated and outdated. Chuang ordered full restoration of email access, systems, and even contract renewals—effectively reinstating an entire agency by judicial fiat.
The plaintiffs, known only as J. Does 1–26, argued that Elon Musk’s advisory role violated the Appointments Clause, claiming he acted as a federal officer without Senate confirmation. They also alleged that the DOGE-led dissolution of USAID violated separation of powers, despite its authorization by Senate-confirmed officials like Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Deputy Administrator Peter Marocco.
Fourth Circuit: The Constitution Is Not a Jobs Program
In a succinct but powerful decision, Judges A. Marvin Quattlebaum Jr. and Paul Victor Niemeyer obliterated Chuang’s ruling, siding with the Trump administration and restoring their full authority to proceed with USAID’s closure.
“The district court found irreparable harm based on subjective fear… But subjective fear that is remote and speculative is insufficient to show the required actual and imminent harm to establish irreparability.”
The court ruled that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate real harm, dismissing vague claims about missed bills, internal unrest, and reputational damage. By contrast, the judges said the harm to the executive branch was immediate and serious if the injunction remained in place.
“The administration made a strong showing it is likely to succeed on appeal,” the court said, emphasizing that Elon Musk is not an ‘Officer of the United States’ requiring Senate confirmation.
Musk’s Role Affirmed
One of the plaintiffs’ central arguments was that Elon Musk, in his role as Senior Advisor to the President, had overstepped constitutional bounds. But the Fourth Circuit flatly rejected that, noting that:
- Musk acted under the authority of duly confirmed officials;
- His social media posts and public comments were not official orders;
- No legal proof was presented that Musk directed the USAID closure without authorization.
In short, being outspoken online doesn’t make someone an unconstitutional actor.
Restoring Executive Authority
This ruling marks a major victory for presidential authority under Article II, reinforcing the notion that the President—not unelected bureaucrats or activist judges—sets the direction of the executive branch.
The court emphasized that USAID’s closure is part of a lawful efficiency agenda, not a rogue action by a private tech mogul. And while the plaintiffs painted themselves as victims of chaos and abuse, the court saw only entrenched bureaucrats resisting change.
“The injunction risked paralyzing the very mechanisms the people elected President Trump to reform,” one senior administration official said.
What’s Next?
With the emergency stay in place, the Trump administration and DOGE are once again free to proceed with USAID’s dismantling, part of a broader effort to shrink the federal workforce and eliminate programs deemed ineffective or redundant.
More than 22 agencies are being reviewed for cuts, according to recent documents obtained by The Washington Post, and this ruling strengthens the legal foundation for that work to continue unimpeded.
Bottom Line
The Fourth Circuit’s intervention is a landmark moment in the battle between the executive branch and a judiciary that has too often acted as a political counterweight to Trump’s reform agenda. The message is clear:
- Presidents set policy.
- Advisors advise.
- Judges don’t get to run the government.
And for those resisting reforms under the banner of anonymous litigation, the Fourth Circuit just gave a reality check: The Constitution isn’t a shield for status quo sinecures.
The swamp is on notice.
