DOGE remains a significant force, with many of its founding members actively engaged in various government roles, and the newly established National Design Studio (NDS) is under the leadership of Joe Gebbia, a cofounder of Airbnb and a close associate of Elon Musk. Even if DOGE does not persist for another year, or until the US semiquincentennial—the date initially set by the executive order that initiated it—the broader objectives of the organization will endure. Since its inception, DOGE has focused on two primary aims: dismantling the administrative state and consolidating data to centralize power within the executive branch. Experts suggest this trend may extend beyond the Trump administration.
“I believe it has changed the norms regarding where legislative authority ends and executive power starts, simply by disregarding those norms,” states Don Moynihan, a public policy professor at the University of Michigan. “This shift isn’t confined to Republican administrations either. Future Democratic presidents might reason, ‘If DOGE could do this, why can’t we?’”
Objectives such as slashing discretionary spending and significantly shrinking the federal workforce have long been promoted by figures like Vice President JD Vance, who in 2021 advocated for a “de-Ba’athification” of the government, and Russell Vought, who currently leads the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). These ambitions were integral to Project 2025. Rather than marking an endpoint, DOGE provided the means; its unique understanding was that controlling technical infrastructure—a feat achievable by a small group—essentially equated to controlling the government.
“No previous government unit has been granted such extensive authority to fundamentally disrupt agencies with minimal oversight,” remarks Moynihan.
According to the Constitution, Congress holds the power to establish and fund federal agencies. However, Trump and his supporters, including Vought and Vance, subscribe to what was previously a fringe perspective on government operation: the unitary executive theory. This notion posits that, akin to a company’s CEO, the president wields near-total control over the executive branch, which includes federal agencies—an authority resembling that of a monarch rather than the figure depicted in the nation’s founding documents.
“The unitary executive theory has driven much of DOGE’s actions across various areas,” explains George Foote, outside general counsel to the US Institute of Peace (USIP), an independent nonprofit funded by Congress. Although USIP operates independently, the Trump administration claimed it fell under the executive branch’s jurisdiction and should therefore be subject to DOGE’s control. “DOGE was undoubtedly a tool utilized by individuals within the White House and OMB to enforce that level of control,” Foote adds.
Justified by the need for efficiency and innovation—and with access to all unclassified systems within the executive branch, as per the executive order that established it—DOGE infiltrated government operations, quickly advancing the administration’s key priorities.
“I can assert they aimed to integrate artificial intelligence and advanced computing capabilities into government operations. There’s ample opportunity for that,” states Foote. “However, at USIP and some other locations, this was merely a facade. They caused significant disruption.”
“President Trump committed to eradicating waste, fraud, and abuse within our bloated government, and the Administration is dedicated to fulfilling this promise for the American populace,” commented White House spokesperson Davis Ingle in response to inquiries.
In March, WIRED disclosed that accessing the Treasury’s payment systems was part of DOGE’s strategy, which included plans to cut funding for the US Agency for International Development (USAID). Instead of consulting Congress—the legally designated authority for creating or dissolving agencies—DOGE could act independently, without needing approval.
With access to servers enabling government-wide email communication, DOGE operatives dispatched messages demanding accountability from federal employees, even urging mass resignations. At the Department of Veterans Affairs, a former DOGE operative, Sahil Lavingia, developed an AI tool to analyze contracts and determine which ones to eliminate.
“They were terminating contracts and dismissing employees. No exceptions,” asserts Foote.
At the Social Security Agency (SSA), a DOGE team attempted to add living immigrants to the “master death file,” effectively disabling their social security numbers. “You simply access the data systems, check payroll records, identify outgoing contracts, and seize control. From there, you can halt payments, eliminate contracts, or merge various data sources,” explains Moynihan. “This mode of operation contrasts sharply with how even experienced bureaucrats like Russ Vought or Stephen Miller used to function.”
The DOGE teams also initiated efforts to integrate disparate datasets from various agencies in a previously unprecedented manner, authorized by another executive order. In April, WIRED reported that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was constructing a master database incorporating data from the SSA, multiple state voter rolls, and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Shortly thereafter, DHS acknowledged DOGE’s assistance in this endeavor—all executed without the legally mandated documentation.
A whistleblower disclosure from Chuck Borges, the former chief data officer at SSA, indicated that DOGE operatives duplicated the sensitive Numerical Identification System (NUMIDENT) database, which holds social security claims records and personal data on all Americans, and stored it in a cloud environment “that seemingly lacks any security oversight from SSA or tracking to ascertain who is accessing or has accessed this data copy.”
“I firmly believe that the data consolidation efforts or prioritization of this administration are linked to DOGE and will form part of its legacy,” asserts Nikhel Sus, deputy chief counsel at Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. CREW is currently representing several plaintiffs, including naturalized citizens, who are suing the government for alleged unlawful sharing of sensitive information across agencies. “Disregarding legal requirements and violating the law is not the appropriate approach to governance in a constitutional democracy.”
On the administrative front, contracts continue to be cut, with Vought persistently attempting—sometimes unsuccessfully—to terminate more federal employees. The DHS database for immigrant tracking has been formalized and expanded. There is no indication that the duplicated NUMIDENT database has been deleted or restricted. Although a judge determined that the swift dismantling of USAID “likely violated the United States Constitution,” the agency remains in a state of uncertainty, neither fully operational nor completely dissolved. (Significant reductions to USAID were indeed part of Project 2025’s agenda for the agency.)
Similarly, despite a federal judge ruling that DOGE’s takeover of USIP was “unlawful,” the organization’s building has been renamed in honor of President Trump, and most staff members remain barred from accessing it. “The situation at USIP reflects a transition from the DOGE ‘wrecking team’ to a more institutionalized part of the government, integrated into the State Department and the White House’s foreign policy apparatus,” asserts Foote. “This is entirely contrary to the USIP Act and fundamentally misaligned with USIP’s intended purpose.”
Moynihan suggests that DOGE’s initiatives will likely have lasting implications for the US government. “Numerous repercussions in specific policy domains will arise from the significant loss of capacity,” he notes. “I estimate that around 200,000 employees may be lost from the federal workforce.” Some researchers have estimated that the loss of USAID has resulted in hundreds of thousands of deaths globally.
Sus remains optimistic about the possibility of reversing the damage inflicted by DOGE. “While we believe this situation is amendable, it will necessitate considerable effort,” Sus states. “Furthermore, it will require substantial diligence from executive branch officials moving forward and from the judiciary.”
