Supreme Court Freezes Over $4 Billion in Foreign Aid
On Friday, the Supreme Court permitted the government to halt payments exceeding $4 billion in foreign aid.
With a 6-3 ruling, the Court granted an urgent request from the Trump administration to block a September 3 decision made by a federal judge. This judge had required a diversification of funds previously approved by Congress.
A representative from the White House Management and Budget office referred to the decision as a significant win, stating that it helps restore the president’s capacity to carry out his policies.
“The influence of left-leaning groups trying to steer the president’s agenda has been curtailed,” the spokesperson added.
The majority opinion noted that the potential harm to executive diplomatic efforts seems to outweigh the concerns raised by certain respondents, including the AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition and the Global Health Council.
The Supreme Court’s decision didn’t explore the larger question regarding Trump’s ability to secure unilateral “immunity” funds that had been authorized by Congress.
Earlier this month, Secretary John Roberts announced that a district judge had temporarily stayed a foreign aid spending order, pending an August 28 proposal currently before Congress.
Last month, Trump had informed House Speaker Mike Johnson of a request to rescind more than $4 billion in foreign aid allocations. This figure includes $3.2 billion from USAID Development Assistance, $322 million from the USAID National Democracy Fund, along with $521 million allocated for international organizations.
This request, dubbed the “Pocket withdrawal,” was introduced to Congress in the latter part of the fiscal year, regardless of whether lawmakers would approve it.
This procedural method hasn’t been utilized by a president in close to five decades.
Currently, the funds are being held up by a nonprofit entity that has filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration and foreign governments.
Judge Amir Ali, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, ruled that Congress must approve any withdrawal proposal for the Trump administration to withhold those funds.
“As of now, Congress hasn’t responded to the President’s proposal to withdraw funds,” Ali noted. “The Impoundment Control Act clearly indicates that it is Congress’s actions that lead to any withdrawal of previously allocated funds, not a special message from the President.”
A nonprofit that is suing the Trump administration over this funding freeze has claimed that the Pocket withdrawal violates federal law and threatens to end critical emergency assistance programs abroad.
Liberal justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson expressed disagreement with Friday’s ruling.
Kagan wrote in dissent, “The implications of today’s ruling are significant. The majority’s choice to avoid a critical examination of this issue raises important questions.” She further stated, “The effect of this ruling allows Congress to stop $4 billion in foreign aid, leaving those funds from reaching their intended beneficiaries.” Kagan concluded by respectfully opposing a decision she believes contradicts the principle of separation of powers.
