Judge Napolitano Explains On Newsmax Why Elon Musk And DOGE Lack ‘the Authority’ to Fire Federal Workers

Newsmax anchor Sharla McBride spoke to the network’s Senior Judicial Analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano this week to get his take on several court rulings that went against the Trump administration.

“So what was your initial reaction to hearing this judge’s ruling that, in fact, Elon Musk and DOGE couldn’t fire all these employees?” McBride began, referring to a recent ruling saying that DOGE’s actions are “likely unconstitutional.”

“So this brings us back to where we were two months ago when the president first created DOGE. Who is making the decision to fire? Is it DOGE actually firing or is it DOGE recommending to the president and the president is firing?” Napolitano replied, adding:

In the course of discovery where the sides exchange information back and forth with each other. In this case, DOGE said they did the firing. And since Elon Musk is not nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate, he doesn’t have the authority to fire. If DOGE had said, we’re just recommending, we’re just gathering facts and recommending to the president, he’s doing the firing, of course, the president could fire at the USAID.

“So you’re saying if the president could fire people, then there’d be no issue at all. If the president said I fired someone, then no one could bring a case, a judge could not overrule it?” McBride pressed.

“With respect to USAID, yes, there are certain people the president can’t fire, but with USAID, that’s correct. So the problem is who is doing the firing? Doge needs to get its ducks in a row. It is just a recommending entity. It doesn’t have the authority to cut budgets or fire people because it wasn’t established by the Congress and Elon Musk wasn’t confirmed by the Senate. So it’s the legal equivalent of advisors to the president in the White House, who can give him all the advice he wants, but they can’t pull the levers of power,” Napolitano added.

“Okay, so I want to get into some events that have unfolded in the last 24 hours. So you had these gang members get on this plane. They were deported at the order of President Trump. While they were flying out of here, a judge said, ‘No, not so fast. You can’t do that. You can’t deport them. You must bring them back,’” McBride continued, adding:

They said they were over international waters. They did not bring them back at the time. So then you have many Republicans coming out and saying this judge should be impeached. We must impeach this judge, and then you have… John Roberts, chief justice, weighing in on this issue. How unusual is it for someone in the Supreme Court to just send out a statement saying that, no, this is not an impeachable offense. We shouldn’t be talking about impeaching judges.

“I’ve never heard of it happening before,” Napolitano replied as Newsmax showed Roberts’s statement on the screen.

“The statement is an accurate statement of the law. The last time a judge was impeached for a decision the judge made, not for any crime committed, was 1804. And he was acquitted in the Senate. That’s Justice Samuel Chase, just a historical footnote. Chief Justice Roberts is correct on the law. Judges can only be impeached on the same basis as a presidential impeachment: treason. bribery, other high crimes, and misdemeanors,” Napolitano said, adding:

Not a decision on the law with which you disagree. That’s one side of this. The other side is judges and justices, that includes the chief justice, are to restrain themselves and not use their judicial office to enter a public dispute. So I think it was, even though the statement was correct, and I think he was trying to say to everybody, back off this district judge, he’s doing his job. I think it was inappropriate for him to make that statement.

Watch the clip above via Newsmax.