Divided Supreme Court Denies Trump‘s Emergency Bid to Cancel Nearly $2 Billion in USAID

US Supreme Court has denied Trump‘s emergency bid to cancel nearly $2 billion in USAID spending.

“I am stunned.” The Supreme Court 5-4 ruled that a sole judge can order billions of dollars out the door–unrecoverable. Justice Alito’s shock is appropriate.

Justice Roberts and Amy Barrett sided with the far-left justices. Barrett continues to be a perpetual disappointment.

Justice Samuel Alito blasted the majority with Justices Thomas, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh joining in dissent:

“Does a single district-court judge who likely lacks jurisdiction have the unchecked power to compel the Government of the United States to pay out (and probably lose forever) 2 billion taxpayer dollars? The answer to that question should be an emphatic “No,” but a majority of this Court apparently thinks otherwise. I am stunned.”

BREAKING: US Supreme Court has denied Trump‘s emergency bid to cancel nearly $2 billion in USAID spending. pic.twitter.com/ogm8HFS0em

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) March 5, 2025

BREAKING: The Supreme Court has ruled that President Trump must unfreeze $1.9 billion in foreign USAID payments. Unbelievable.

Justice Samuel Alito BLASTS the majority with Justices Thomas, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh joining in dissent:

"Does a single district-court judge who… pic.twitter.com/mt8eL4yj7L

— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) March 5, 2025

With the Supreme Court's refusal today to rein in DC activist judges sabotaging the President's Article II executive powers, Congress must step up.@Article3Project is drafting proposed legislation to bring much-needed reforms to the DC District Court.

Gloves are coming off.

— 🇺🇸 Mike Davis 🇺🇸 (@mrddmia) March 5, 2025

A former Federal Prosecutor weighs in:

A couple of truth bombs about today's decision by SCOTUS on the TRO issued by Judge Ali:

The DOJ never appealed the original TRO entered by him. Rather than do that, they opted to "maneuver" around thru a hole he left in his order that allowed them to rely on statutes/regs/…

— Shipwreckedcrew (@shipwreckedcrew) March 5, 2025

A couple of truth bombs about today’s decision by SCOTUS on the TRO issued by Judge Ali:

The DOJ never appealed the original TRO entered by him. Rather than do that, they opted to “maneuver” around thru a hole he left in his order that allowed them to rely on statutes/regs/ contract terms to delay making the payments.

Right or wrong – they didn’t appeal his decision outright, which is one of the things the Plaintiff’s pointed out to the Supreme Court. The only appeal was of his Feb. 25 Order that the payments be made by Feb. 26 at 11:59 pm.

Second, Roberts stepped in when there were 2 hours left and there was much uncertainty about whether the payments could be made as directed by Judge Ali on a logistical basis.

That issue is dealt with by today Order.

ADVERTISEMENT

Judge Ali is directed by the Order to be specific about what claims his order covers and he needs to consider the logistical problems of making the payments in fashioning a new order.

“Given that the deadline in the challenged
order has now passed, and in light of the ongoing preliminary injunction proceedings, the District Court should clarify what obligations the Government must fulfill to ensure compliance with the temporary restraining order, with due
regard for the feasibility of any compliance timelines.”

The Govt will surely appeal any subsequent order that directs it to pay parties who are not before the Court.

So, don’t read more into the Order than is there.

Yes, it would have been nice for the Court to simply vacate the TRO. But that would not have solved the problem. As the Order notes, the Preliminary Injunction proceedings are ongoing.

The briefing on that is complete and a hearing was supposed to take place yesterday. I expect Judge Ali will now hold that hearing since his TRO expires on 3/10 — 5 days.

The jurisdictional issues are raised in the briefing so Judge Ali is going have to confront them as part of any decision he makes.

None of that was before the SCOTUS in a properly briefed form.

Roberts always prefers regular order. He stepped in because the order to pay by 11:59 that night was the problem.

The other issues can all be dealt with in regular order — let Judge Ali enter his TRO, the Govt appeals the TRO to the Circuit Court, and then the case gets to SCOTUS on the merits.

🧵on SCOTUS order on denial in AIDS Vaccine/Global Health Case. Justice Alito's dissent said it best when he opened with "I am stunned." But a note on what the majority actually did, which is slightly different than it appears–an is even more outrageous. 1/

— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) March 5, 2025

Newsmax:

A divided Supreme Court on Wednesday declined to let President Donald Trump’s administration withhold payment to foreign aid organizations for work they already performed for the government.

Handing a setback to Trump, the court in a 5-4 decision upheld Washington-based U.S. District Judge Amir Ali’s order that had called on the administration to promptly release funding to contractors and recipients of grants from the U.S. Agency for International Development and the State Department for their past work.

Conservative Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh dissented from the decision.

The order by Ali, who is presiding over an ongoing legal challenge to Trump’s policy, had originally given the administration until February 26 to disburse the funding, which it has said totaled nearly $2 billion that could take weeks to pay in full.

Chief Justice John Roberts paused that order hours before the midnight deadline to give the Supreme Court additional time to consider the administration’s more formal request to block Ali’s ruling. The Supreme Court’s 6-3 conservative majority includes three justices Trump appointed during his first presidential term.

Acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris said in a Supreme Court filing on March 3 that blocking Ali’s order “is warranted to prevent reinstatement of a new, short-fused deadline that would unlawfully commandeer federal payment processes anew.”

Harris argued that the judge’s order amounted to judicial overreach and had given the administration too little time to scrutinize the invoices “to ensure the legitimacy of all payments.” Lawyers representing the administration said in a separate February 26 filing that full payments could take weeks.

Trump, pursuing what he has called an “America First” agenda, ordered a 90-day pause on all foreign aid on his first day back in office on January 20. That order, and ensuing stop-work orders halting USAID operations around the world, have jeopardized delivery of life-saving food and medical aid, throwing global humanitarian relief efforts into chaos.

Aid organizations accused Trump in lawsuits of exceeding his authority under federal law and the U.S. Constitution by effectively dismantling an independent federal agency and canceling spending authorized by Congress.

Aid organizations said in a Supreme Court filing on February 28 that they “would face extraordinary and irreversible harm if the funding freeze continues,” as would their employees and those who depend on their work.

The organizations’ “work advances U.S. interests abroad and improves — and, in many cases, literally saves — the lives of millions of people across the globe. In doing so, it helps stop problems like disease and instability overseas before they reach our shores,” lawyers for the foreign aid groups wrote.

“The government’s actions have largely brought this work to a halt,” the lawyers wrote, adding that the Trump administration “comes to this court with an emergency of its own making.”

Among the plaintiffs in the litigation are the AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition, Journalism Development Network, international development company DAI Global and refugee assistance organization HIAS.

The Trump administration had kept the disputed payments largely frozen despite a temporary restraining order from Ali that they be released, and multiple subsequent orders that the administration comply. Ali’s February 25 enforcement order at issue before the Supreme Court applied to payment for work done by foreign aid groups before February 13, when the judge issued his temporary restraining order.

Ali, who was appointed by former President Joe Biden, issued his temporary restraining order to prevent irreparable harm to the plaintiffs while he considers their claims.

Trump and his adviser Elon Musk have taken dramatic steps to reshape and shrink the federal government. They have dismantled some agencies, fired thousands of workers, dismissed or reassigned hundreds of officials, and removed the heads of independent agencies, among other actions.

As he moves to end American-backed humanitarian efforts in numerous countries, Trump’s administration has sent funding termination notices to key organizations in the global aid community. Global aid groups have said the U.S. retreat endangers the lives of millions of the world’s most vulnerable people including those facing deadly diseases and those living in conflict zones.

UPDATE: Professor Margot Cleveland eloborates:

Please also read @shipwreckedcrew comments which expand and focus on my "far from over" point. https://t.co/RIoRPewGBt and which circles back to my follow up point following district court's order. 1/ https://t.co/4zoIsYc9Qz

— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) March 5, 2025

2/ https://t.co/dOG62ERI0b

— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) March 5, 2025

3/ I THINK @shipwreckedcrew & I are saying same thing, albeit with us have different focus. He speaks of Roberts liking things in "regular course" which is my point re "prudence." And I speak of it as "far from over" and he stresses "not to read more in the order than there is"

— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) March 5, 2025

4/ I agree with all that but believe the "prudence" ("regular course") is extremely damaging and will end up causing more emergencies–and that's been what I've focused on, i.e., the "I am stunned" as opposed to don't read this too far as it doesn't really do much.

— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) March 5, 2025

5/5 @shipwreckedcrew can add his thoughts if I'm misreading his points, but today's another good example (I hope) that neither of us go off the cliff.

— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) March 5, 2025

6/ @CaseyMattox_ made similar points https://t.co/RmmO4LmrPD

— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) March 5, 2025

7/ which I responded to here https://t.co/8s8XbGTWJE

— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) March 5, 2025

8/8 And Casey here. The exchange shows, I think, we "agree" but have different focuses. https://t.co/dm9goBJ8DC

— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) March 5, 2025

What a mess.