Supreme Court Rejects Trump Administration’s Request to Freeze Billions in Foreign Aid….Read More

The United States Supreme Court has ruled against the Trump administration’s attempt to keep billions of dollars in foreign aid frozen.

The United States Supreme Court has ruled against the Trump administration’s attempt to keep billions of dollars in foreign aid frozen. This decision, made by a divided court, comes after the White House had sought to block the funds that had already been approved by Congress. However, the ruling does not specify an exact timeline for the release of the money, allowing the administration to continue disputing the matter in lower courts.

A Close Decision by the Supreme Court
The ruling, which was decided by a 5-4 vote, saw Chief Justice John Roberts join Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson in the majority. Meanwhile, Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh dissented.

The majority emphasized that, since a court-ordered deadline for spending the money had already passed, lower courts should now clarify the obligations the government must fulfill to comply with the restraining order.

Alito’s Strong Dissent
Justice Samuel Alito expressed strong disagreement with the ruling, saying he was “stunned” that the court would allow a lower court judge to unfreeze the aid funds.

“A federal court has many tools to address a party’s supposed nonfeasance. Self-aggrandizement of its jurisdiction is not one of them,” Alito wrote in his dissent.

Although the ruling is significant, legal experts believe it is a modest decision. Steve Vladeck, a Supreme Court analyst and professor at Georgetown University Law Center, explained that the order does not force the Trump administration to immediately release the funds. Instead, it allows the lower court to enforce its decision more clearly.

“The unsigned order does not actually require the Trump administration to immediately make up to $2 billion in foreign aid payments; it merely clears the way for the district court to compel those payments, presumably if it is more specific about the contracts that have to be honored,” Vladeck said.

He also noted that the strong dissent from four justices indicates that the Supreme Court may remain deeply divided in future cases related to Trump’s administration.

Background: Trump’s Foreign Aid Freeze
The case centers around the Trump administration’s decision to freeze billions in foreign aid from the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). In January, Trump halted these funds as part of his broader agenda to cut government spending and reshape foreign policy. However, nonprofit organizations that depend on these funds sued the administration, arguing that the move violated Congress’s authority over government spending.

Nonprofit Organizations Warn of Devastating Consequences
Several nonprofit organizations warned that the funding freeze could have serious consequences. In court filings, they described the aid as essential to U.S. interests abroad, as well as to global health and stability.

The funding advances U.S. interests abroad and improves—and, in many cases, literally saves—the lives of millions of people across the globe,” the organizations stated. “In doing so, it helps stop problems like disease and instability overseas before they reach our shores.”

Lower Court Orders the Release of Funds
On February 13, U.S. District Judge Amir Ali, appointed by President Joe Biden, issued an order requiring that the funds be temporarily released while the case was reviewed. However, the Trump administration was accused of ignoring the order and continuing to block spending. In response, Judge Ali issued another ruling, demanding that the money be distributed by midnight on Wednesday.

In a last-minute attempt to delay the ruling, the Trump administration appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that it needed more time to process the payments. The administration claimed it was making “substantial efforts” to review requests but could not meet the deadline set by the judge.

Debate Over Compliance
The groups that sued have accused the administration of deliberately delaying payments. They argued that a small number of political appointees in Trump’s administration were refusing to authorize the aid.

“The government has not taken ‘any meaningful steps’ to come into compliance,” the organizations stated in a filing to the Supreme Court.

Chief Justice John Roberts briefly paused the case on Wednesday to allow both sides to submit written arguments. However, the court ultimately ruled against the administration, making it clear that lower courts could now enforce the release of the funds.

The Scope of Trump’s Foreign Aid Cuts
The Trump administration has disclosed in court filings that it is attempting to terminate more than 90% of USAID’s foreign aid awards. In total, nearly 5,800 USAID projects have been canceled, with only 500 remaining active. The retained programs have a total value of approximately $57 billion.

Additionally, about 4,100 State Department aid programs have been cut, with only 2,700 continuing.

Impact on Global Aid Programs
Due to the funding freeze, numerous aid programs around the world have come to a standstill. The decision has disrupted projects that provide crucial services, such as global health initiatives and humanitarian assistance.

The freeze has also affected USAID’s workforce, with many employees placed on leave or terminated. Critics argue that these measures could harm U.S. foreign relations and weaken America’s influence abroad.

What Happens Next?
Although the Supreme Court’s decision clears the way for the aid funds to be released, the legal battle is not over. The Trump administration may continue to challenge the lower court’s ruling, delaying the distribution of funds even further.

As the case moves forward, it remains to be seen how quickly the money will be released and whether the administration will face further legal consequences for its actions. Meanwhile, the affected nonprofit organizations continue to push for an immediate resolution, emphasizing the urgent need for aid worldwide.