A federal judge has declined to grant a request for a temporary restraining order in the case brought by state attorneys general arguing that Elon Musk's appointment to make sweeping government changes was illegal.

On Feb. 13, 14 attorneys general sued Musk, the so-called Department of Government Efficiency and President Donald Trump, alleging that President Trump had violated the Appointments Clause of the Constitution. The suit argues that any power to change government through the so-called Department of Government Efficiency must be granted by the Senate, not the president.

But on Tuesday Judge Tanya Chutkan denied plaintiffs' call for a temporary restraining order in the case, saying that even though "DOGE’s unpredictable actions have resulted in considerable uncertainty and confusion for Plaintiffs and many of their agencies and residents," the plaintiffs didn't meet the threshold for imminent irreparable harm.

RELATED STORY | New suit alleges Trump's appointment of Elon Musk to make changes via DOGE is unconstitutional

Still, she adds that "Plaintiffs raise a colorable Appointments Clause claim with serious implications. Musk has not been nominated by the President nor confirmed by the U.S. Senate, as constitutionally required for officers who exercise “significant authority pursuant to the laws of the United States.”

Judge Chutkan has ordered the parties in the case to meet and discuss next steps, which may still include the plaintiffs seeking a preliminary injunction against Musk and DOGE.

RELATED STORY | Who is running DOGE? New court docs say Elon Musk is not agency's administrator