The Trump administration may seek a Supreme Court order to freeze billions in foreign aid, potentially igniting a significant legal conflict regarding the president’s authority over federal spending.
On Monday, the Justice Department submitted an emergency application to the Supreme Court after a federal appeals court upheld a previous ruling.
Attorney General D. John Sauer contended in the application that the lower court’s injunction would compel the administration to allocate funds at an accelerated rate, even against Congress’s requests for withdrawal.
“The president cannot maintain a unified stance in foreign affairs or interact effectively with Congress while district courts mandate the administration to pursue its objectives,” Sauer wrote.
One of Trump’s initial actions in office involved pausing about $30 billion in foreign aid, which has triggered swift legal challenges from global health and aid organizations.
Sauer noted that by September 30, a total of $30 billion, including $10.5 billion, could expire.
He claimed that although the administration intended to deploy $6.5 billion by the deadline, utilizing the remaining $4 billion could pose a “significant and urgent threat” to the separation of powers and US foreign policy.
Last month, Trump informed Congress of his intention to employ a rare “pocket withdrawal” to cancel aid.
According to budget laws under the Water Storage Management Act (ICA), the administration can request Congress to annul specific funds. Lawmakers can review the request, but during a temporary hold of 45 days, the administration can withhold funds. If Congress declines the request, funds must be released.
However, Sauer asserted that the injunction would compel the funds’ release.
“The president then proposed a rescue plan and activated ICA procedures designed to resolve political disputes in such scenarios,” he argued. “It appears especially misguided for the district court to allow an APA case to circumvent ICA procedures now, given the president’s explicit invocation of these processes.”
Plaintiffs, representing Global Health and Aid Groups, opposed the administrative hold that suspends the Court of Appeals’ decision while the government’s request is under consideration.
“The government claims it is facing an ’emergency’ requiring rapid fund allocation, which they have created themselves,” they stated. “USAID and the State Department were required to allocate these funds by March 2024 when Congress set expenditures but opted not to act quickly.”
“The government isn’t experiencing any discernible harm from adhering to the law temporarily while the court reviews its stay request,” they added.
This situation marks another phase in the ongoing legal struggle over Trump’s efforts to reduce foreign aid.
In March, a judge denied a 5-4 ruling that effectively preserved nearly $2 billion in withheld foreign aid.
More recently, a judge from the U.S. D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals mandated US District Judge Amir Ali to allocate billions for aid jobs after discovering that challengers lacked the standing to pursue their case.
The ruling was later modified, permitting plaintiffs to seek a preliminary injunction on different legal bases. Judge Ali granted this new interim injunction on Wednesday after plaintiffs revised their request.
The Trump administration subsequently appealed, with the appeals court maintaining a 2-1 decision and urged a request for emergency relief.
