Well, howdy there, Internet people, it's Bell again. So today, we're going to talk about a judge

finding Elon and Doge's moves against U.S.Aid to likely be unconstitutional. A federal judge issued a

pretty sweeping 68-page decision and ordered Doge and Elon to basically stand down because, quote, the court

finds that defendants' unilateral actions to shut down U.S. aid likely violated the United

States Constitution. There's another part of the decision that isn't getting the press it should,

and we'll talk about that as well.

The order requires email and payment system access to be reinstated. The judge also prohibited

Doge from moving forward with shuttering USAID, with a list of things now prohibited such as

firing or placing employees on administrative leave,

closing buildings, deleting websites, and so on.

Basically, without the direct authorization of a USAID employee with the legal authority to make the move,

nothing can be changed right now. The argument in question isn't really

about U.S.A. specifically. It's about Elon's whole role and whether it violates the appointments

clause. The judge said, quote, to deny plaintiff's appointments clause claim solely on the basis that, on paper,

Musk has no formal legal authority relating to the decisions at issue,

even if he is actually exercising significant authority on governmental matters,

would open the door to an end run around the Appointments Clause.

The judge went on, adding quote,

If a president could escape Appointments Clause scrutiny by having advisors go beyond the

traditional role of White House advisors who communicate the president's priority to agency heads,

and instead exercise significant authority throughout the federal government so as to bypass duly appointed officers.

The appointments clause would be reduced to nothing more than a technical formality.

...