The Supreme Court rejected an appeal from Trump to block billions of dollars in foreign aid.

The Supreme Court rejected an appeal from Trump to block billions of dollars in foreign aid.

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court rejected the Trump administration’s appeal.The appeal aimed to withhold billions in international aid approved by Congress.The White House can still challenge the case in lower courts.

The court did not specify when the funds should be provided.Four conservative justices—Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh—dissented.Five justices voted for the majority: Roberts, Barrett, Kagan, Sotomayor, and Jackson.

The majority said lower courts should “clarify what obligations the government must fulfill to ensure compliance with the temporary restraining order,” since a court-ordered deadline to spend the funds passed last week.

Alito, in a sharp dissent, expressed surprise at the court’s decision to allow a lower court judge to order the government to lift a freeze on foreign aid in the case.

“A federal court has many tools to address a party’s alleged unlawful actions,” Alito added. “One of them is not self-aggrandizing its field.”

Georgetown University Law Center professor called the 5-4 decision “extremely modest.”

Supreme Court’s Ruling Leaves Foreign Aid Payments

• The unsigned order allows the district court to enforce the payments.
• The court may need more details on the contracts to proceed.
• It does not force the Trump administration to pay $2 billion immediately.
• The court remains divided on key Trump-related cases.
• Four justices strongly opposed this decision.

The appeal reached the Supreme Court in just a few days, by the standards of the federal judiciary.

Trump’s efforts to overhaul government and centralize power within the executive branch since taking office in January are the subject of the second lawsuit to reach the justices.

Legal Battle Over Trump’s Freeze on Billions

• The issue involves billions of dollars in foreign aid.
• The aid comes from USAID and the State Department.
• Trump froze the funds in January.
• He aimed to control spending and align policies.
• Several charities rely on these funds.
• They use them for global health and other initiatives.
• The organizations filed a lawsuit.
• They claim the freeze violates federal law.
• They argue it oversteps Congress’ authority on spending.

The groups described the administration’s actions as “devastating” in a brief released Friday.

They informed the court that the funding “improves — and, in many cases, literally saves — the lives of millions of people around the world and advances American interests abroad.”

The organizations claimed that by doing so, “it helps prevent problems like disease and instability abroad before they reach our shores.”

On February 13, US District Judge Amir Ali issued an order. He directed that a large portion of the funds temporarily stop flowing. He is investigating the matter.

Later, Ali ordered the Trump administration to spend the disputed funds by midnight Wednesday. The plaintiffs claimed the administration was obstructing the spending. They also argued it was violating the order.

President Joe Biden appointed Ali to the bench.

• Hours before the deadline, the Trump administration filed an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court.
• It requested the court to put the decision on hold for a few days.
• The government argued it was making “substantial efforts” to process payments.
• However, it could not release the funds quickly enough to meet Ali’s deadline.

That explanation has been rejected by the groups that filed the suit, who claim that certain political appointees in the administration are “essentially refusing to authorize any payments.”

The groups claimed in a petition to the Supreme Court on Friday that the government has taken “no meaningful steps” to comply.

Roberts issued an “administrative stay” on Wednesday. This gave the government a temporary reprieve. The issue is on hold until both sides submit written arguments. The chief justice handles emergency cases from the Washington, D.C. federal appeals court.

Trump Administration Plans 90% Reduction in USAID Grants

The Global Health Council is based in Washington, D.C. It represents various organizations overseeing health programs. The AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition is a New York-based group. It focuses on accelerating HIV prevention. Both organizations oppose the stay.

In court documents, the Trump administration made a revelation. It plans to cancel about 90% of USAID’s international aid grants.

According to an administration document, “approximately 5,800 USAID awards were terminated and more than 500 USAID awards were retained.”

According to the petition, “the total maximum value of retained awards is approximately $57 billion.”

Remarks on Supreme Court rejected an appeal from Trump

The government informed the lower court that in addition to the termination of USAID awards, “approximately 4,100 State awards were terminated and approximately 2,700 State awards were retained,” citing the State Department.

A global funding freeze and investigations into billions of dollars in aid have brought aid projects to a standstill. Additionally, the Trump administration has either laid off or furloughed most of USAID’s staff.

Visit for more updates on the USA Current Affair.

For official legal order details, visit the Supreme Court of the United States.