The Trump administration has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to lift an injunction preventing it from halting billions of dollars in foreign aid payments, escalating a legal battle over President Donald Trump’s efforts to curtail international assistance programs. In an emergency filing submitted Tuesday, the Justice Department urged the justices to allow the administration to proceed with its funding freeze, citing foreign policy authority and looming deadlines for unspent funds.
The dispute stems from Trump’s executive order on January 20, the day of his second inauguration, which imposed a 90-day pause on all foreign aid. The move was followed by sweeping efforts to weaken the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), including putting much of its staff on leave and considering folding the independent agency into the State Department. Critics argue the administration is attempting to dismantle decades of U.S. humanitarian policy.
Two nonprofit groups — the AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition and the Journalism Development Network — filed suit, alleging that the freeze was unlawful and endangered critical global programs. U.S. District Judge Amir Ali, a Biden appointee, sided with the plaintiffs earlier this year, ordering the government to pay nearly $2 billion in outstanding aid and issuing an injunction to ensure continued disbursements.
Although a divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit later ruled that the nonprofits lacked grounds for an injunction, the full appeals court declined to suspend Ali’s order, leaving the administration bound by the injunction for now. The Justice Department warned that without immediate Supreme Court intervention, the State Department must spend more than $12 billion in appropriated aid by September 30 before those funds expire.
The case highlights the administration’s aggressive attempt to reshape U.S. foreign aid by asserting broad executive authority over congressional appropriations. A Supreme Court decision could have sweeping implications not only for U.S. humanitarian commitments worldwide but also for the balance of power between the executive branch and Congress in controlling federal spending.
