The Trump Administration made a last-ditch effort on Wednesday night to petition the Supreme Court in order to stop the flow of previously frozen foreign aid worth $2 billion. The Trump administration’s action highlights the legal fight that continues over the funding freeze imposed early on in the Trump presidency.
The Foreign Aid Dispute: Background
In his first days in office, Donald Trump issued a presidential order that froze the budget for foreign aid. Administration justified its decision with the claim that they needed more time to examine potential “waste fraud and abuses” in U.S. expenditure. As a result, the U.S. Agency for International Development’s (USAID) assistance and that of the State Department was immediately suspended.
A lower court judge recently ruled in favor of the administration and ordered the release of funds immediately. The decision was made in response to an appeal filed by prominent non-profit organizations challenging the legality and the freeze on funding. Court set an 11:59pm deadline. The Trump Administration has until Wednesday, ET to meet the deadline.
Trump Administration’s Argument before the Supreme Court
The Trump Administration argued in its emergency submission that the order of the lower court to unfreeze funds immediately would interfere with what the administration intended as an “orderly” review process. According to the filing, such a comprehensive order infringes upon jurisdictional boundaries and inappropriately allows a single district court to oversee the federal government’s contracting decisions related to foreign aid – an area traditionally under the considerable discretion of the Executive Branch.
The administration also argues that the court below lacked jurisdiction to make the order. They claim that the federal Government has sovereign immunity against claims of contract breach, but only in the Court of Federal Claims.
Parties involved in the lawsuit
The lawsuit, filed by the AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition (AVC) and Global Health Council named as defendants President Trump, USAID and various government officials. According to them, the unilateral freezing funds of funds infringed on federal laws and put at risk numerous programs that save lives around the world.
Contractors who were involved in these programs said that Trump’s administration had left them owing hundreds of million dollars. This led to massive layoffs, and pushed them near the edge of financial collapse. These organisations provide services like public health initiatives and humanitarian aid in multiple countries.
The result of the Supreme Court’s appeal will have a significant impact on U.S. aid to foreign countries and the power balance between the executive branch and the judicial branch of the government. Both sides’ legal arguments highlight the complexity of presidential authority and federal spending oversight.