On March 5, the US Supreme Court rejected US President Donald Trump's request to freeze nearly $2 billion in foreign aid as part of his efforts to cut government spending.
Points of attention
- The US Supreme Court rejected Trump's request to freeze nearly $2 billion in aid from USAID, leading to a cascading crisis that threatens critical medical care and political stability.
- Lawsuits against the aid freeze are deemed unconstitutional, as they prevent Congress from allocating funds to USAID, highlighting the abuse of presidential power claims.
- The court's ruling underscores the ongoing legal battles against Trump's attempts to cut government spending, with a majority vote of 5 to 4 in favor of freezing USAID funds.
The court ruled to freeze aid from USAID
The court's brief ruling was unsigned, as is typical practice when judges consider urgent motions. It merely noted that the judge who ordered the government to restore payments "must specify what obligations the government must fulfill."
However, as the authors note, this decision is one of the court's first steps in response to a wave of lawsuits filed in response to Trump's attempts to drastically change the government.
It is noted that the vote passed 5 to 4, with Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Amy Coney Barrett joining the three liberal members to form the majority.
At the same time, Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., expressing the position of the four judges who disagreed with the decision, stated that the majority "seriously erred."
Does a single district court judge, who probably has no jurisdiction, have the unfettered power to force the United States government to pay out (and possibly permanently lose) $2 billion in taxpayer dollars? The answer to that question should be a resounding "no," but the majority of this court apparently thinks otherwise. I am stunned.
The publication recalled that the presidential administration stopped the aid on January 20, Trump's first day in office. Recipients and other nonprofit groups filed two lawsuits challenging the freeze as an unconstitutional exercise of presidential power that prevents Congress from allocating appropriations for the United States Agency for International Development (USAID).
The groups said the frozen funds had created a cascading crisis that threatened critical medical care around the world, leaving products rotting in warehouses, destroying businesses and creating risks of disease spread and political instability.
The Supreme Court ruled on a lawsuit by global health organizations and nonprofit groups challenging Trump's executive order to immediately halt all foreign aid programs. The plaintiffs argued that it not only violates several federal laws but also constitutes an unconstitutional abuse of presidential power. Donald Trump has boasted that he has frozen all foreign aid, calling it a "waste of money."
One of the groups involved in the lawsuit responded to the court's decision by saying, "Trump is not a king, he cannot ignore the law."
