Rules of the Supreme Court against the Trump administration in the case of foreign aid

The United States Supreme Court has instructed a Federal District Court that applies a temporary restriction order that prevented the Trump administration from blocking approximately $ 2 billion in foreign aid. This effectively means that the White House must follow a process ordered by the Court to release the funds.

In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of dismissing the argument of sovereign immunity of the Trump administration. The Trump administration had tried to block the payment of subsidies funded by Congress for the United States Agency for International Development Programs.

The Trump administration was sued by the AIDS vaccine defense coalition, which said it had promised funds promised by the Government frozen by the White House. The AIDS vaccine defense coalition said it provides effective HIV prevention options to countries around the world.

Related history | The Trump administration is putting the USAID employees on license worldwide and shooting at least 1,600

USAID is at the forefront of global development and humanitarian assistance, working in more than 100 countries to promote economic growth, health, education and democratic governance. However, the Trump administration states that it is full of unnecessary expenses and fraud.

The Trump administration said the plaintiffs could not file a lawsuit against the government without their consent. Previously, a district court rejected this argument and said that the Defense Coalition of the AIDS vaccine can claim its payment rights.

Judge Samuel Alito wrote a dissident opinion, questioning the authority of the District Court to force a payment of $ 2 billion.

“Today, the Court takes a very unfortunate false step that rewards an act of judicial arrogance and imposes a fine of $ 2 billion to US taxpayers. The district court has made clear its frustration with the government, and the respondents raise serious concerns about the default for the completed work. But the orderly relief is simply a simply, an answer too extreme,” Alito wrote.

The American Union of Civil Liberties welcomed the decision of the Supreme Court in the case.

“President Trump’s attempt to stop foreign aid funds was an abuse of imprudent, cruel and unprecedented executive power. The lower court correctly argued that President Trump exceeded his authority when he unilaterally declared that he was freezing funds for the programs that Congress had already authorized, rigrating federal contractors who had already done work, “said Anthony D. Romero, executive director of the American Union of Civil Liberties.” We are delighted to see that the Supreme Court reached the Constitution and the Law as an essential control in the Executive Branch in this case presented by the public citizen presented by the public citizen. “”