A divided Supreme Court has recently turned down a request from the Trump administration to challenge a federal judge’s order on foreign aid release. By a narrow margin of 5-4, the court directed U.S. District Judge Amir Ali to clarify his previous ruling that demanded the administration to release nearly $2 billion in aid for projects that had already been completed.
While this ruling serves as a temporary setback for President Trump’s administration, various nonprofit organizations and businesses still await payment that they claim they are entitled to. One organization, due to the funding freeze, had to lay off 110 employees, highlighting the real-world impact of these judicial decisions.
This marks the second time the current administration has found itself unable to convince the Supreme Court to intervene in a case initiated by actions from the Trump era. Justice Samuel Alito, leading the dissenting group of four conservative justices, expressed disbelief at the decision, arguing that Judge Ali overstepped his authority and was unfairly penalizing taxpayers.
The Supreme Court’s decision leaves Ali’s temporary hold on the spending freeze intact, with a hearing set for Thursday to discuss a longer-term injunction. The majority opinion emphasized that the administration had not contested Ali’s original order, only the deadline, which has since lapsed.
In a curious alliance, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett joined three liberal justices to create a majority, while Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh sided with Alito’s dissent.
The Trump administration contends that the circumstances have shifted since they moved from a blanket freeze on spending to individual evaluations. This led to the cancellation of approximately 5,800 contracts and an additional 4,100 grants, totaling nearly $60 billion. The foreign aid freeze, prompted by an executive order from Trump highlighting wasteful programs misaligned with his foreign policy, has led to legal challenges. Critics argue that the freeze violates federal law and has halted crucial life-saving programs worldwide.
Judge Ali had temporarily reinstated funding in February, but after finding no compliance from the government two weeks later, he imposed a deadline for payment for completed work. The administration has since appealed Ali’s directive, calling it “intrusive” and objecting to the urgency of the timeline.
The ongoing legal battle exemplifies the tension between judicial oversight and executive power, leaving important issues surrounding foreign aid and humanitarian efforts in the balance.
