Supreme Court Hands Trump Major Victory In Foreign Aid Fight

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Trump administration on Friday, allowing it to freeze over $4 billion in foreign aid through a legal mechanism known as a “pocket rescission.” In a 6–3 decision, the justices overturned a lower court ruling that had ordered the release of the funds. The administration hailed the ruling as a victory for executive authority in shaping foreign policy.

The funds in question were part of foreign aid previously approved by Congress. They included more than $3.2 billion allocated to USAID programs, $322 million to the Democracy Fund, and over $500 million to international organizations. President Trump submitted the rescission proposal close to the end of the fiscal year, allowing the freeze to take effect automatically without waiting for congressional approval.

The lawsuit challenging the freeze was brought by several nonprofit organizations, including global health and advocacy groups, which argued the action violated the Impoundment Control Act. A lower court previously agreed, ruling that only Congress has the authority to rescind previously appropriated funds. However, the Supreme Court sided with the administration, citing the importance of executive control over foreign affairs.

The court’s ruling does not fully resolve whether a president can unilaterally impound funds but permits the temporary freeze to remain in effect while legal challenges proceed. Justices Kagan, Sotomayor, and Jackson dissented, raising concerns about executive overreach.

In a related development, the Supreme Court also agreed to hear a separate case concerning the president’s authority to remove Federal Trade Commission members without cause. The outcome could significantly impact the balance between presidential power and agency independence.

That case, scheduled for arguments in December, will address whether statutory protections shielding commissioners from removal violate constitutional principles and whether courts can intervene to stop such dismissals during ongoing legal disputes.

Related Posts

GOP Set to Add Another Seat to House In State Redistricting Effort

A national redistricting fight is intensifying, with Republican-led legislatures across several states advancing new congressional maps aimed at expanding GOP representation. Encouraged by former President Donald Trump,…

Keeping Ashes at Home: What You Should Know Before Deciding

The loss of a loved one leaves an emotional space that words often can’t fill. For many, keeping a loved one’s ashes at home offers a way…

SHE BROKE THE INTERNET BY DOING WHAT “OLDER WOMEN” NEVER DO

They said she was “too old” to dress like that. So she did it anyway — and millions couldn’t look away. When her photo hit the feed,…

Jimmy Fallon reveals his family’s ”first baby” has passed away: ”Miss you so much”

Jimmy Fallon recently shared a deeply emotional tribute to his beloved golden retriever, Gary, who passed away after over 13 years with his family. Known for his…

Couple Secretly Marries, Fans React in Shock

Hollywood fans were recently surprised by news that one of the industry’s most private couples secretly wed in Tuscany. Far from the spotlight, the couple exchanged vows…

Pilot’s chilling final words before deadly plane crash comes to light

The Voepass disaster stands as a haunting reminder of how fragile the bond of trust is between humans and the technology they rely on. This tragedy goes…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *