Supreme Court to hear dispute over access to DOGE records
publishers 67articles 103first reported 3 Oct, 09:00 UTCdeveloping since 3 Oct · 27 editions
The U.S. Supreme Court agreed Tuesday to hear the Trump administration’s challenge to efforts by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington to obtain records from the Department of Government Efficiency. Arguments are expected in early 2027, with a ruling likely by that summer.
The dispute began after CREW filed a Freedom of Information Act request in early 2025 seeking records including DOGE’s organizational chart and financial disclosures. The administration declined to process the request, arguing that DOGE is an advisory body within the Executive Office of the President and therefore is not subject to FOIA. CREW sued, seeking a ruling that DOGE must comply with the law.
A federal judge permitted limited discovery about DOGE’s structure and authority, including a deposition of administrator Amy Gleason. The Supreme Court later intervened in a 6-3 decision, directing lower courts to narrow the discovery order because it encompassed internal executive branch recommendations and whether they were followed.
CREW subsequently narrowed its request to information about DOGE’s structure, directives involving federal contracts and workers, and examples of its exercise of independent authority. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit allowed that inquiry to proceed, prompting the administration’s appeal to the Supreme Court.
HOW THIS STORY WAS MADE
Written from 8 articles, 8 with the publisher's own text; 8 independent newsrooms once syndicated copies count as one; this version written 273 h after the record first saw the story; the editor kept it as written.
- Publishers
- 67
- Source articles
- 103
- Given to the writer
- 8, 8 with the article's own text
- Independent newsrooms
- 8
- This version written
- 273 h after the record first saw the story
- Second model (editor)
- kept as written
- Publication gate
- passed
- Human review
- none
WHAT THE EDITOR DID
The second model checked the writer's draft against the same sources and published it as written.
Written by a language model from the sources above, then checked by a second model that may only cut, attribute or correct. How it works →