The Supreme Court on Friday allowed the Trump administration to freeze $4 billion in foreign aid funding. Federal officials’ requested emergency relief from the nation’s highest court, as Congress already approved the money.
This marks the third time that the Trump administration has tried to appeal to the Supreme Court over the issue. The funds are set to expire at the end of the fiscal year on Sept. 30.
What the judges said
In its majority ruling, justices argued that the president should be able to withhold the funds as “the asserted harms to the Executive’s conduct of foreign affairs appear to outweigh the potential harm faced by respondents.” In addition, justices said the government made a “sufficient showing” that the Impoundment Control Act precludes the lawsuit brought by nonprofit organizations seeking to enforce the appropriations.
Download the SAN app today to stay up-to-date with Unbiased. Straight Facts™.
Point phone camera here
However, the majority noted that the order should not be read as a final determination on the case.
“The relief granted by the Court today reflects our preliminary view, consistent with the standards for interim relief,” the justices said.
Three justices, Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson, dissented. Kagan wrote in the dissent that the emergency application raises important issues about the relationship between the president and Congress.
“It arises from the refusal of the President and his officers to obligate and spend billions of dollars that Congress appropriated for foreign aid,” Kagan said.
She argued that the majority on the court went too far in its ruling, and that the Trump administration’s appeal does not meet SCOTUS’ standard for emergency relief.
“We therefore should have denied this application, allowed the lower courts to go forward, and ensured that the weighty question presented here receives the consideration it deserves,” Kagan said.
Attorney Nicolas Sansone with Public Citizen Litigation Group, who represents the AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition plaintiffs, said the Supreme Court ruling “erodes separation of powers principles that are fundamental to our constitutional order.”
“It will also have a grave humanitarian impact,” Sansone said in a statement.
Previous ruling
The Supreme Court’s latest order comes after a ruling earlier in September by federal Judge Amir H. Ali, where he sided with the nonprofit organizations suing the federal government. These organizations have previously said that the $4 billion that is being frozen is meant to go to food security programs; helping other countries build their trade capacity and assist victims of torture, according to The New York Times.
Ali said in his Sept. 3 ruling that the administration has to “comply with the appropriations laws unless and until Congress does change the law.”
