In short, at present the head of DOGE is acting beyond the power of his employment within the White House. Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution confers authority on the legislative branch the power to deal with how the funds received by the Federal Treasury are dispensed. The funds must be dispensed according to the appropriations bills passed by Congress. The appropriation bills determine how those funds are dispensed for government programs from infrastructure to social security including payments to those who served. The President cannot unilaterally appoint a person to override congressional mandate. That power rests solely with the elected members to the house and senate of the U.S. Congress under Art 1(8). The Article 2 powers do not permit that, in fact, the “take care” provisions specifically requires the President to carefully and faithfully follow the laws of the U.S., in this instance Art 1(8). That is what creates the separation of powers and co-equal branches of government. The U.S. Federal Court is entitled to issue a temporary restraining order until Congress passes a constitutional amendment and legislation authorising the head of DOGE to usurp its authority. There is nothing in Trump v US 603 US. (2024) that grants any such immunity or authority. It is not expressly allowed by Article 2 and sits far over the outer perimeter of the whole of the U.S. Constitution and any official or non official duty given to the President under it. There is no unilateral prerogative granted of that kind, that is the kind of prerogative granted to a King. But even the King of England’s prerogative of that kind in 1789 was ultimately subject to the Privy Council, a division of the House of Lords, which was the result of the English civil war.

Trump’s SHOCKING Plan to Deport American Citizens to El Salvador Prisons youtu.be/Tauw296D1_A?feature… via @YouTube