WASHINGTON (States Newsroom) — The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday ordered the Trump administration to continue payments on $2 billion in foreign aid that had been frozen, overturning an administrative stay that Chief Justice John Roberts entered in late February.
Justices Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Clarence Thomas dissented with the ruling. Alito wrote that he was “stunned” by the decision to let a district court judge’s temporary restraining order stand while the case moves forward.
“Today, the Court makes a most unfortunate misstep that rewards an act of judicial hubris and imposes a $2 billion penalty on American taxpayers,” Alito wrote. “The District Court has made plain its frustration with the Government, and respondents raise serious concerns about nonpayment for completed work. But the relief ordered is, quite simply, too extreme a response.”
The Supreme Court’s order, which isn’t signed by any of the justices, called on the district court to “clarify what obligations the Government must fulfill to ensure compliance with the temporary restraining order, with due regard for the feasibility of any compliance timelines.” It represented the first time the high court has weighed in on a major element of one of the many cases filed against the Trump administration.
The other justices are Roberts, Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, Amy Coney Barrett and Ketanji Brown Jackson.
Judge Amir H. Ali of the U.S. District Court of the District of Columbia, who is overseeing the case, AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition v. Department of State, has scheduled a hearing on the request for a preliminary injunction for Thursday.
A preliminary injunction generally would have a longer period of time in place than a temporary restraining order.
Programs authorized by Congress
American Civil Liberties Union Executive Director Anthony D. Romero released a written statement that the district court “rightly held that President Trump exceeded his authority when he unilaterally declared he was freezing funding for programs Congress had already authorized, stiffing federal contractors who had already done work.”
“We’re pleased to see the Supreme Court uphold the Constitution and act as an essential check on the executive branch in this case brought by Public Citizen,” Romero wrote.
“What happens next is critical,” he added. “The Trump administration has a constitutional duty to comply with this order. At its core, this is a case about checks and balances and the rule of law.”
Alito dissent
Alito wrote in his dissent the district court’s temporary restraining order, which called on the Trump administration to continue payment on that foreign aid while the case proceeded, should be treated as a preliminary injunction.
“A TRO, as its name suggests, is ‘temporary,’ and its proper role is to ‘restrain’ challenged conduct for a short time while the court considers whether more lasting relief is warranted,” Alito wrote. “The order here, which commanded the payment of a vast sum that in all likelihood can never be fully recovered, is in no sense ‘temporary.’ Nor did the order merely ‘restrain’ the Government’s challenged action in order to ‘preserve the status quo.’”
Alito wrote the Trump administration was “likely to suffer irreparable harm if the District Court’s order,” requiring the $2 billion in foreign aid payments to be paid out for completed work, was allowed to stand.
But, Alito also wrote that the organizations that brought the lawsuit would have experienced “serious” repercussions under the Trump administration’s halt to billions in foreign aid payments for already completed work.
“They contend that the failure to pay the money in question would cause them irreparable harm because without those funds, they could not continue to operate or would have to reduce the work they do,” Alito wrote. “As a result, they claim, recipients of their services would suffer. These potential consequences are, of course, serious.”
