The Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to step into a legal battle over foreign aid funds, warning that without intervention, it will be forced to disburse billions of dollars, overriding the administration’s foreign-policy judgments.
In an emergency appeal filed Tuesday, the justice department urged the justices to block a lower court order requiring the government to obligate some $12 billion in aid before the fiscal year ends on September 30, according to CNN.
Solicitor general John Sauer argued that forcing immediate spending would “inflict irreparable diplomatic costs” and undermine the administration’s authority. “Any lingering dispute about the proper disposition of funds that the President seeks to rescind shortly before they expire should be left to the political branches, not effectively prejudged by the district court,” he wrote, according to Politico.
The case stems from US President Donald Trump’s 90-day freeze on foreign aid announced on his inauguration day. As per news agency Reuters, the pause was followed by moves to gut USAID, including sidelining much of its staff and exploring its absorption into the State Department.
Two nonprofit groups, AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition and Journalism Development Network, sued, claiming the freeze unlawfully blocked congressionally approved funds earmarked for global health and HIV/AIDS programs.
While a three-judge panel of the DC Circuit Court ruled earlier this month that only Congress has standing to challenge spending impoundments under the 1974 Impoundment Control Act , the full court has yet to decide.
For now, US District Judge Amir Ali’s order remains in effect, requiring the administration to spend billions by the September deadline. The Trump administration told the justices that the district court has “installed itself as supervisor-in-chief of further spending and rescissions proposals,” as CNN reported.
Plaintiffs argue that the freeze jeopardises lives and undermines Congress’s constitutional role.
Mitchell Warren, executive director of the AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition, said in a statement cited by Politico, “Time and again, this administration has shown their disdain for foreign assistance and a disregard for people’s lives … the question being put to SCOTUS is whether they will be complicit in further eroding the constitutional commitment to checks and balances.”
The administration has asked the Supreme Court to issue a ruling by September 2 to avoid what it calls “extensive preliminary steps” to release the funds.
The justices narrowly declined to intervene in March, allowing litigation to continue, but the issue is now back before the high court with even greater urgency.
In an emergency appeal filed Tuesday, the justice department urged the justices to block a lower court order requiring the government to obligate some $12 billion in aid before the fiscal year ends on September 30, according to CNN.
Solicitor general John Sauer argued that forcing immediate spending would “inflict irreparable diplomatic costs” and undermine the administration’s authority. “Any lingering dispute about the proper disposition of funds that the President seeks to rescind shortly before they expire should be left to the political branches, not effectively prejudged by the district court,” he wrote, according to Politico.
The case stems from US President Donald Trump’s 90-day freeze on foreign aid announced on his inauguration day. As per news agency Reuters, the pause was followed by moves to gut USAID, including sidelining much of its staff and exploring its absorption into the State Department.
Two nonprofit groups, AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition and Journalism Development Network, sued, claiming the freeze unlawfully blocked congressionally approved funds earmarked for global health and HIV/AIDS programs.
While a three-judge panel of the DC Circuit Court ruled earlier this month that only Congress has standing to challenge spending impoundments under the 1974 Impoundment Control Act , the full court has yet to decide.
For now, US District Judge Amir Ali’s order remains in effect, requiring the administration to spend billions by the September deadline. The Trump administration told the justices that the district court has “installed itself as supervisor-in-chief of further spending and rescissions proposals,” as CNN reported.
Plaintiffs argue that the freeze jeopardises lives and undermines Congress’s constitutional role.
Mitchell Warren, executive director of the AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition, said in a statement cited by Politico, “Time and again, this administration has shown their disdain for foreign assistance and a disregard for people’s lives … the question being put to SCOTUS is whether they will be complicit in further eroding the constitutional commitment to checks and balances.”
The administration has asked the Supreme Court to issue a ruling by September 2 to avoid what it calls “extensive preliminary steps” to release the funds.
The justices narrowly declined to intervene in March, allowing litigation to continue, but the issue is now back before the high court with even greater urgency.
You may also like
Saudi Arabia introduces Tourism and Hospitality as core subject for grade 12 students
Assam CM rules out FIR against activist Syeda Hameed
Punjab floods: Farmlands under water, thousands displaced, says Cong leader
Mamata Banerjee condoles the death of people in J&K landslides
75% of Muslim mums stressed about school lunches - with 92% sending a meal from home
