Supreme Court Blocks Trump’s Foreign Aid Freeze
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled against President Donald Trump’s attempt to withhold nearly $2 billion in foreign aid funds, delivering a legal setback to his administration’s broader push to scale back humanitarian efforts. In a 5-4 decision, the court upheld an order requiring the government to release payments owed to organizations for work they had already completed. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett joined the court’s three liberal justices in rejecting Trump’s request, while Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh dissented.
The legal battle began after Trump issued an executive order pausing all foreign aid on his first day back in office, effectively freezing payments that had been approved by Congress. U.S. District Judge Amir Ali twice ordered the administration to resume payments, but aid groups argued that his orders were repeatedly ignored. In response, the Supreme Court’s ruling instructed Ali to clarify the government’s obligations and set a new timeline for compliance, since the original deadline had already passed.
Alito, writing for the dissent, sharply criticized the ruling, calling it an “unfortunate misstep” that imposed a “$2 billion penalty on American taxpayers.” The Trump administration had argued that the freeze was necessary to scrutinize spending and that the court’s intervention amounted to judicial overreach. Acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris insisted that payments had already begun and that thousands of USAID contracts would be retained, while others would be canceled.
Humanitarian organizations have warned that the aid freeze has disrupted life-saving programs worldwide, forcing mass layoffs and cutting off assistance to vulnerable populations. In their lawsuit, the groups accused Trump of unlawfully bypassing Congress and dismantling USAID, which has seen thousands of staff members fired or furloughed. Public Citizen, one of the organizations involved in the case, responded to the ruling by stating, “Trump is not a king. He cannot ignore the law.”
This decision marks another legal blow to Trump’s administration, which has faced multiple court challenges over its aggressive efforts to shrink government programs. While some courts have sided with Trump’s policies, the Supreme Court’s ruling suggests that it may be willing to check his power, at least in cases where Congress’s authority is at stake.
