“I Am Stunned” – SCOTUS Dissenters Rage As ‘Liberals’ Unfreeze $2BN USAID Foreign-Aid Payments

In a 5-4 vote, The US Supreme Court refused to bolster President Donald Trump’s foreign-aid freeze, reinstating a lower court order that requires the quick disbursement of as much as $2 billion owed to contractors for already completed work.

Over four dissents, the justices rejected Trump’s request to toss out the trial court order, which affects money owed by the US Agency for International Development and State Department. 

The dissent by Justices Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh was extremely strongly worded:

Does a single district-court judge who likely lacks jurisdiction have the unchecked power to compel the Government of the United States to pay out (and probably lose forever) 2 billion taxpayer dollars?

The answer to that question should be an emphatic “No,” but a majority of this Court apparently thinks otherwise.

I am stunned.

…

Today, the Court makes a most unfortunate misstep that rewards an act of judicial hubris and imposes a $2 billion penalty on American taxpayers. 

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. 

A federal court has many tools to address a party’s supposed nonfeasance. 

Self-aggrandizement of its jurisdiction is not one of them. 

I would chart a different path than the Court does today, so I must respectfully dissent.

Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Barrett sided with the liberal members of the court.  

The majority told the trial judge to reset the deadlines for paying the money since his original deadline has now passed.

This decision only affects completed work, not future freezes.

The ruling compels the Government to release funds for work that had already been completed before February 13, 2025. However, it does not block the administration from continuing to pause or cut future foreign assistance. Trump’s broader agenda of cutting USAID funding may continue for projects that were not yet underway.

Key Takeaways

• The ruling forces immediate payment of $2 billion for completed work but does not prevent broader USAID cuts.

• Future freezes and funding pauses are still possible but may face legal challenges under the APA.

• The ruling does not permanently restore funding, but it creates a legal pathway for future lawsuits if the Government halts disbursements unlawfully.

• Trump’s broader foreign aid policy remains largely intact, though judicial pushback may limit some of its implementation.

We cannot wait to see how Musk and Trump respond to this fucking farcical outcome…