Opponents of President Donald Trump’s USAID spending freeze will take cheer from the Supreme Court’s refusal to intervene this week. But there is less cause for celebration than they claim. The Justices’ decision to allow a trial judge’s order resuming spending to proceed is merely the first procedural skirmish in a larger constitutional battle that will return to the Court. In the meantime, Trump’s campaign to restore executive energy will still play out with the home field advantage created by the Constitution itself.
In Department of State v. Aids Vaccine Advocacy Coalition, a D.C. federal trial judge issued an order forcing the administration to release about $2 billion to American-based humanitarian aid groups. Upon taking office, Trump ordered a 90-day freeze of foreign aid to determine that the grants remained effective and legitimate, properly disbursed, and in U.S. foreign policy and national security interests. Judge Amir Ali, just confirmed by the Senate to the D.C. federal district court in President Joe Biden’s lame duck period, took an extraordinary measure: he issued a temporary restraining order requiring payment at least for ...
