CNN
–
The Supreme Court, split on Wednesday, rejected the Trump administration’s request to maintain billions of dollars in foreign aid approved by Congress.
However, the court did not immediately say when the money had to be released.
The ruling was 5-4.
The order was not signed, but the four conservative justice opposed – Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh. It had five judges, including Supreme Justice John Roberts, Amy Connie Barrett, Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson.
The majority said lower courts should “clear what obligations the government must fulfill to ensure compliance with the temporary restraining order,” given that the deadline for last week’s money-based court order has already been passed.
In a strongly expressed dissent, Alito wrote that he was “unstood” at the court’s decision to allow a judge in the lower court to order the administration to freeze foreign aid in question in the case.
Alito added: “Federal courts have many tools to address the unpredictable non-flight of parties. Self-expansion of their jurisdiction is not one of them.”
The ruling was 5-4, but “very modest,” said Steve Vladeck, an analyst and professor at the CNN Supreme Court at Georgetown University Law Center.
“The unsigned order doesn’t actually require the Trump administration to immediately supplement up to $2 billion in foreign aid payments. That’s just making it clear how the district courts will enforce these payments, perhaps if it’s more specific about the contracts that must be respected,” Vladeck said. “Nevertheless, four justice opposed and vigorously opposed from such decisions — is a sign that courts will be split in many of the Trump-related cases that are already affected, perhaps along these exact lines.”
The appeal was very quickly, by federal judicial standards, competing with the High Court within days. The second case is reaching a judge who deals with Trump’s moves, unifying power within the administrative sector, and dramatically reshaping the government after taking power in January.
At the heart of the incident are billions of foreign aid from the State Department and the US International Development Agency. Several nonprofits that rely on funding for Global Health and other programs have alleged that government moves have stolen Congress’s power to manage government spending and violated federal laws that determine how agencies make decisions.
A simple matter on Friday, the group described the administration’s actions as “devastating” effects.
They told the court that the funds “will drive our interests overseas, and in many cases literally save the lives of millions of people around the world.”
“In doing so, it will help to stop problems like illness and instability overseas before reaching the coast,” the group said.
On February 13, US District Judge Amir Ali ordered that much of the money be temporarily flowing while he reviewed the case. A few days later, the plaintiffs argued that the administration continued to block spending against its orders, and Ali ordered the Trump administration to spend money on the matter by midnight Wednesday.
Ali was appointed to the bench by President Joe Biden.
The Trump administration has urged the court to suspend an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court just hours before the deadline, urging it to suspend it for at least a few days. The administration has “significant efforts” to review payment requests and spend money, but while the government has aged, it has not been able to change Spigot quickly enough to meet Ali’s timeline.
The accused group balked the explanation, claiming that a small number of political appointees within the administration “essentially refuse to approve payments.”
“The government has not taken any ‘meaning measures’ to ensure compliance,” the group said the Supreme Court filed on Friday.
Acting alone, Roberts gave the administration a short reprieve on Wednesday, suspending the case so that both parties could submit written discussions, publishing what is known as “administrative stays.” The Supreme Court will handle emergent cases rising from the Federal Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C.
Among the groups challenging the freeze is the AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition, a New York-based organization and a global health council based in Washington, DC, working to speed up HIV prevention.
The Trump administration has made it clear in court filings if it is about to end more than 90% of the USAID Foreign Aid Awards.
“In total, nearly 5,800 USAID Awards have been concluded and more than 500 USAID Awards have been retained,” the administration’s submission said.
“The total ceiling value of the retained award is approximately $57 billion,” Filing said.
In addition to the termination of the USAID Awards, “approximately 4,100 state awards have been fired and about 2,700 state awards have been retained,” the government told lower courts, referring to the State Department.
Aid programs around the world are stopping programs around the world from suspending due to the freeze and review of billions of dollars of assistance. And it’s coming either that the Trump administration has put a large portion of the USAID workforce on leave or fired them.
On Capitol Hill, Democrats said the ruling shows Trump’s power to freeze spending is not infinite.
“The money was already allocated and things were already active, so I think the Supreme Court ruled the right way. And now the administration needs to unleash them and allow those contractors and work.”
Rep. Pramila Jayapal called it a “very important ruling” by the “Trump-controlled court.”
“I think it will strengthen… Congress is approved for the right money, people rely on that permit for those programs, and I think when you do your job, when it’s approved, you should get paid,” a Washington Democrat told CNN.
When asked if he was certain that payments would be on, Jayapal said, “But I hope the Trump administration will pay attention to the Supreme Court.”
CNN’s Jennifer Hansler and DeVancole contributed to this report.
