In a significant legal setback for former President Donald Trump, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to allow his administration to withhold nearly $2 billion in payments to foreign aid organizations. The 5-4 decision, announced on Wednesday, upheld a lower court order requiring the government to release funds owed to contractors and grant recipients for work already completed under U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and State Department programs.
The ruling marks a pivotal moment in an ongoing legal battle over Trump’s efforts to halt American-funded humanitarian projects worldwide. Chief Justice John Roberts and conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett joined the court’s three liberal justices to form the majority, while conservative Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh dissented.
The Legal Dispute
The case stems from a temporary restraining order issued by Washington-based U.S. District Judge Amir Ali, who is overseeing a lawsuit challenging Trump’s foreign aid freeze. Judge Ali had originally set a February 26 deadline for the administration to disburse the funds, but Chief Justice Roberts temporarily paused the order to allow the Supreme Court more time to review the case.
The Supreme Court’s unsigned order did not provide a detailed rationale for its decision. However, it instructed Judge Ali to clarify the government’s obligations to comply with the temporary restraining order, taking into account the feasibility of meeting payment deadlines.
Trump’s “America First” Agenda
Trump’s administration had sought to freeze foreign aid payments as part of its broader “America First” agenda, which included a 90-day pause on all foreign aid announced on his first day back in office on January 20. This move, along with subsequent stop-work orders, disrupted USAID operations globally, jeopardizing the delivery of life-saving food, medical supplies, and other critical aid.
Aid organizations, including the AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition, Journalism Development Network, international development company DAI Global, and refugee assistance group HIAS, filed lawsuits accusing Trump of overstepping his authority under federal law and the U.S. Constitution. They argued that the administration’s actions effectively dismantled an independent federal agency and canceled spending authorized by Congress.
Impact on Global Humanitarian Efforts
In court filings, aid organizations warned that the funding freeze would cause “extraordinary and irreversible harm” not only to their operations but also to the millions of people who rely on their work. Lawyers for the groups emphasized that U.S.-funded humanitarian efforts “advance U.S. interests abroad and improve—and, in many cases, literally save—the lives of millions of people across the globe.”
The Trump administration, however, argued that Judge Ali’s order amounted to judicial overreach and gave the government insufficient time to scrutinize payment invoices to ensure their legitimacy. Acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris stated that blocking the order was necessary to prevent “unlawfully commandeering federal payment processes anew.”
A Broader Pattern of Government Reshaping
The foreign aid freeze is part of a broader pattern under the Trump administration to reshape and shrink the federal government. Trump and his advisers, including Elon Musk, have taken dramatic steps to dismantle agencies, fire thousands of workers, and remove the heads of independent agencies. These actions have sparked widespread criticism and legal challenges from advocacy groups and lawmakers.
As the administration moved to end American-backed humanitarian efforts in numerous countries, it sent funding termination notices to key organizations in the global aid community. Global aid groups have warned that the U.S. retreat endangers the lives of millions of vulnerable people, including those facing deadly diseases and living in conflict zones.
What’s Next?
Judge Ali has scheduled a hearing for Thursday to address the plaintiffs’ request for a preliminary injunction. His temporary restraining order remains in effect through March 10. The Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the lower court’s order is a significant victory for aid organizations, but the legal battle is far from over.
For now, the ruling ensures that foreign aid groups will receive payment for their past work, providing a lifeline to millions of people who depend on their services. However, the broader implications of Trump’s foreign aid policies and their impact on global humanitarian efforts remain a contentious issue.