WASHINGTON (AP) — While various elements of President Donald Trump’s agenda are facing roadblocks due to legal challenges, Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) is experiencing a notably different outcome in court.

Labor unions, Democratic officials, and federal employees have initiated multiple lawsuits contending that DOGE is infringing upon privacy rights and overstepping its authority against other governmental branches.

However, judges from both Democratic and Republican backgrounds have often disagreed with these claims. Notably, critics of DOGE have struggled to secure temporary restraining orders aimed at preventing Musk’s team from accessing critical government databases.

U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss, appointed by Barack Obama, pointed out, “It is not the job of the federal courts to oversee the security of information systems within the executive branch,” in a case concerning the Office of Personnel Management.

The court victories for DOGE stand out against the backdrop of the numerous legal obstacles Trump is currently encountering, which include setbacks on issues like limiting birthright citizenship, halting congressionally approved foreign aid, and restricting certain healthcare services for transgender youths.

If Musk’s adversaries continue to face difficulties with their lawsuits, he may advance significantly in his mission to reduce the size of the federal workforce and government.

White House Deputy Press Secretary Harrison Fields remarked, “The ongoing legal successes for the Trump administration should come as no surprise to those familiar with our Constitution, which clearly defines the role of the Executive Branch—something that President Trump and his administration adhere to rigorously. Despite the resistance campaign’s efforts, they will likely continue to falter in their attempts to undermine the Constitution and deny the President’s lawful authority to govern the Executive Branch.”

Cary Coglianese, a noted expert in administrative law at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, indicated that plaintiffs have struggled to prove there would be irreparable damage if DOGE’s initiatives were allowed to continue. “They are rapidly progressing while the judiciary remains lagging,” he commented.

Skye Perryman, head of Democracy Forward, an organization pushing back against the Trump administration through lawsuits, stated their commitment to maintaining legal pressure on the White House. “We haven’t seen a federal judge approve DOGE’s actions yet,” she asserted.

There have been exceptions to DOGE’s favorable rulings, particularly in two lawsuits concerning the Treasury Department’s systems, which are responsible for distributing trillions in federal funds and safeguarding sensitive data such as bank details and Social Security numbers. Traditionally, these databases are managed solely by nonpartisan career professionals. A judge in Washington has limited DOGE’s access to two staff members, while another in New York has issued a temporary ban on the department’s activities.

Norm Eisen, an attorney involved in the House Democrats’ first impeachment of Trump, believes it is premature to declare the legal efforts ineffective. He noted that U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, also an Obama appointee, expressed apprehension regarding Musk’s apparent “unchecked authority” amidst a case addressing federal data and worker layoffs. While she did not grant the requested temporary restraining order from 14 Democratic state attorneys general, Chutkan acknowledged the potential for a strong case against Musk and DOGE as proceedings advance.

Eisen represents current and former employees of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), which was shut down by Musk and Trump. His lawsuit alleges that they are wielding powers that should be reserved for elected officials or Senate-confirmed appointees. “These are not trivial matters,” Eisen stated. “They pertain to some of the most fundamental aspects addressed by our Constitution and laws.”

John Yoo, a law professor at the University of California, Berkeley, highlighted that a significant factor in DOGE’s victories has been the administration’s assertion that Musk acts as a presidential adviser without independent authority. This reminds him of a legal battle from the 1990s when Hillary Clinton chaired a healthcare task force, which a federal appeals court ruled did not need to comply with open meeting regulations. “This is how they are winning these lawsuits,” Yoo said. “They are operating within the confines established by the D.C. circuit.”

U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman heard over three hours of arguments on a request for a temporary restraining order involving DOGE’s access to personal information collected by the federal government. Although she did not render an immediate decision, she questioned the argument put forth by labor unions and sought clarification from administration lawyers regarding the extent of DOGE’s information needs.

Emily Hall from the Justice Department stated that DOGE has been assigned the responsibility for making “broad, sweeping reforms” that necessitate such access. Judge Boardman responded, “It’s a rather ambiguous explanation.”

A significant triumph for Trump and Musk occurred in Boston, where U.S. District Judge George O’Toole Jr. sanctioned the administration’s deferred resignation program, commonly referred to as a buyout, enabling employees to resign while continuing to receive pay until September 30. Although challenged by labor unions, O’Toole ruled against them based on technical legalities, indicating they lacked standing to bring the suit. Judge O’Toole was appointed by Bill Clinton.

Similarly, Judge Moss in the case related to the Office of Personnel Management did not restrict Musk’s team from accessing Education Department data, citing DOGE staff assurances regarding legal compliance concerning information sharing.

U.S. District Judge John Bates, a George W. Bush appointee, also refrained from intervening in DOGE’s activities within the Department of Labor, Health and Human Services, and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Although Bates expressed significant concern about privacy issues raised in this legally intricate matter, he concluded that the evidence presented did not warrant a courtroom intervention as of yet.

Administration representatives emphasized that DOGE is not “recklessly accessing every data system they wish” and has undergone security training and signed nondisclosure agreements.