The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Friday in favor of President Donald Trump, permitting his administration to pause $4 billion in congressionally approved foreign aid for the fiscal year ending September 30.
This decision marks another instance where the court has supported the White House's efforts to redirect spending that aligns with the president's "America First" priorities, despite congressional allocations.
The funds in question support a range of international initiatives, including global health programs, HIV efforts, United Nations peacekeeping, and democracy promotion abroad.
The Trump administration has argued these expenditures conflict with U.S. foreign policy objectives, prompting moves to rescind them through a "pocket rescission" strategy.
This approach leverages the fiscal year's end to potentially nullify the appropriations without immediate congressional approval.
Aid organizations, including those focused on global health and victim support, filed suit in February, contending that the withholding represents an overreach of executive authority.
U.S. District Judge Amir Ali, appointed by former President Joe Biden, initially ordered the funds to be obligated, emphasizing Congress's constitutional control over spending.
An appeals court partially upheld the challenge, but the administration swiftly appealed to the Supreme Court.
Chief Justice John Roberts issued a temporary stay, allowing time for review.
In its unsigned order, the court indicated that enforcing the lower court's directive could hinder the executive's foreign affairs conduct, outweighing immediate harms to nonprofits vying for the grants.
The 6-3 conservative majority granted interim relief, cautioning that the ruling does not resolve the case's merits.
This emergency docket intervention underscores ongoing tensions in the balance of powers.
The court's three liberal justices — Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson — dissented sharply.
Justice Kagan's statement criticized the majority for prioritizing executive flexibility over legislative intent.
That "is just the price of living under a Constitution that gives Congress the power to make spending decisions through the enactment of appropriations laws," she wrote.
The decision arrives amid urgent budget talks on Capitol Hill, where lawmakers face a deadline to avert a government shutdown.
It raises enduring questions about presidential rescission powers, especially as the administration has pledged to allocate $6.5 billion of related aid by month's end while seeking to withhold the remainder.
This ruling could set precedents for future executive actions on congressionally mandated spending.