Chief Justice John Roberts issued a temporary stay Wednesday, blocking a lower court ruling that required the Trump administration to release $2 billion in frozen foreign aid by midnight. The Supreme Court intervention grants the administration additional time to argue its case, as legal challenges mount over its extensive cuts to U.S. foreign assistance programs.
The ruling follows an emergency appeal from the Trump administration, which argued that U.S. District Judge Amir Ali's order created "an untenable payment plan at odds with the President's obligations under Article II to protect the integrity of the federal fisc and make appropriate judgments about foreign aid-clear forms of irreparable harm."
At the center of the dispute is the administration's decision to freeze billions of dollars in foreign aid from the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), a move ordered by President Donald Trump in January as part of broader federal spending reductions. Ali had previously imposed a temporary order requiring the funds to be restored, and after plaintiffs alleged the administration was failing to comply, the judge set a deadline of 11:59 p.m. Wednesday for the payments to be made.
Acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris told the Supreme Court that complying with Ali's order would take "multiple weeks" and was not feasible under the given timeframe. "The district court's imminent and arbitrary deadline makes full compliance impossible," Harris wrote in the filing.
Roberts' stay does not decide the case on its merits but allows the court time to consider the administration's arguments. The groups suing the administration have been ordered to submit responses by Friday at noon. The Supreme Court will then determine whether to extend the stay or let Ali's ruling take effect.
Meanwhile, a Wednesday court filing revealed the extent of the administration's cuts to USAID funding. "In total, nearly 5,800 USAID awards were terminated, and more than 500 USAID awards were retained," the filing stated. It further detailed that "approximately 4,100 State awards were terminated, and approximately 2,700 State awards were retained."
The administration has defended the reductions, with officials stating in the filing that they are "clearing significant waste stemming from decades of institutional drift" and restructuring aid programs "to use taxpayer dollars wisely to advance American interests."
The impact of the cuts is already being felt by nonprofit organizations and international aid contractors, with numerous development projects suspended due to the funding freeze. The administration's filings did not specify which programs had been eliminated but noted that retained contracts have a total ceiling value of approximately $57 billion.
Legal analysts say the case could have broader implications for executive power and the limits of judicial oversight in budgetary decisions. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit previously questioned whether the administration could even appeal Ali's order, writing in its ruling that "appellants cite no case that has held that such a later issued supporting order is appealable."
Steve Vladeck, a professor at Georgetown University Law Center, emphasized that Roberts' decision is procedural rather than indicative of a final ruling. "It's really just a play for time-in this case, perhaps as little as two days-to give the justices time to sort out whether or not they should pause Judge Ali's ruling or force the government to turn the challenged foreign aid funding back on while the litigation continues," Vladeck said.
The cuts to foreign aid are part of a broader push by the Trump administration to significantly reduce the size of the federal government. Alongside the funding freeze, the administration has placed most of USAID's workforce on leave or terminated their positions.
