I’d approach the Governors Association with this, and see what the States will do about it. The State Department is part of the Fed, which operates at the will of the States.
If the Governors Association isn’t going to get involved, then it’s time to create involvement by the States otherwise.
This is an unusual, and quite dangerous Executive, and Legislative Administration we have today that requires an unusual, and aggressive response from the States that are the ones ultimately responsible for the integrity of this Union.
The states would have had a lot more leverage over the Federal government if they hadn’t short-sightedly passed the 16th Amendment, allowing Congress to levy an income tax without apportioning it among the states.
That may have been true before the 17th amendment where the state governments could choose senators who would respect states' rights. Now the only real power the states can exercise over the federal government is the power to call a Constitutional convention with the aim to reconfigure or even dissolve the current federal government just as they did in 1787 with their "few modifications" to the Articles of Confederation. That isn't merely playing with fire, it is juggling nitroglycerin.
"Liberals" adamantly reject the idea that the federal government is a creature subservient to the states, but there is a way in which the states could assert ultimate control. All it takes is a simple majority in 3/4 (38) of the states to pass an amendment to the Constitution - and it only takes (a simple majority in) 2/3 (34) of the states to call a constitutional convention. The mere act of calling a convention would be a shot across the bow of "liberal" politics; actually passing an amendment could set "liberalism" back 100 years.The states could, for instance, constitutionally fix the number for the justices of SCOTUS (which is currently subject to a mere act of Congress). Fixing that number at its current value of 9 should be utterly unexceptionable, and therefore should be easy to pass.
Add to that a separate amendment which automatically added one justice every to SCOTUS every four years, provided that the winning POTUS had nominated said justice before winning election and provided that the states make room on the nine-member court by voting an existing member of SCOTUS "off the island." That would have to be done by a quadrennial convention of the states, but the key would be to do it by the state governments, rather than by the people of the states (as senators are now elected). That would be good in principle, because the Senate no longer represents the state governments, but the people of the states. By passing that amendment, the states would take upon themselves the oversight of SCOTUS - and thus, we can hope, enforce the Ninth and Tenth Amendments against Congress and the President.
If 38 states were really serious about it, they could pass an amendment naming names of the justices of SCOTUS - thereby directly asserting control over the composition of SCOTUS.