{"id":28375,"date":"2025-12-28T08:21:52","date_gmt":"2025-12-28T08:21:52","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/cndailynews.store\/?p=28375"},"modified":"2025-12-28T08:21:52","modified_gmt":"2025-12-28T08:21:52","slug":"supreme-court-hands-trump-major-victory-in-foreign-aid-fight-6","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cndailynews.store\/?p=28375","title":{"rendered":"Supreme Court Hands Trump Major Victory In Foreign Aid Fight"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n
\n
\"\"
\u00a0Getty Images<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n

This article may contain commentary
\nwhich reflects the author’s opinion.<\/p>\n

\n<\/div>\n
\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

The U.S. Supreme Court permitted the government to freeze more than $4 billion in foreign aid payments that President Trump moved to cancel last month through a rare \u201cpocket rescission.\u201d<\/p>\n

Advertisement<\/div>\n

In a 6-3 decision, the justices granted the Trump administration\u2019s emergency appeal, halting a lower court ruling that had ordered the previously appropriated funds to be released.<\/p>\n

\u201cThis is a massive victory in restoring the President\u2019s authority to implement his policies,\u201d a spokesperson for the White House Office of Management and Budget told the New York Post. \u201cLeft-wing groups\u2019 ability to seize control of the president\u2019s agenda has been shut down.\u201d<\/p>\n

The majority of the justices found the \u201charms to the Executive\u2019s conduct of foreign affairs appear to outweigh the potential harm faced by respondents.\u201d They include the AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition, Journalism Development Network, Center for Victims of Torture and the Global Health Council, The Post noted.<\/p>\n

\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

The Supreme Court\u2019s ruling stopped short of weighing in on the larger issue of whether President Trump has the authority to unilaterally \u201cimpound\u201d funds approved by Congress.<\/p>\n

Advertisement<\/div>\n

Recently, Trump formally notified House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) of his move to cancel more than $4 billion in foreign aid, including $3.2 billion in U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) programs, $322 million from the joint USAID\u2013State Department Democracy Fund, and $521 million in State Department contributions to international organizations.<\/p>\n

The request, known as a \u201cpocket rescission,\u201d was submitted to Congress so close to the end of the fiscal year on Sept. 30 that it would automatically take effect regardless of congressional action.<\/p>\n

It marks the first time in nearly five decades that a president has used the maneuver.<\/p>\n

Advertisement<\/p>\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

The funding in question had been designated for nonprofit organizations currently suing the Trump administration, as well as for foreign governments.<\/p>\n

Earlier this month, U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta Ali, a Biden appointee, ruled that the administration could not withhold the money without congressional approval of the rescission proposal.<\/p>\n

\u201cTo date, Congress has not responded to the President\u2019s rescission proposal by rescinding the funds,\u201d Ali wrote. \u201cAnd the [Impoundment Control Act] is explicit that it is congressional action \u2014 not the President\u2019s transmission of a special message \u2014 that triggers rescission of the earlier appropriations.\u201d<\/p>\n

The nonprofit organizations challenging the Trump administration\u2019s funding freeze contended that the pocket rescission violated federal law and jeopardized critical, lifesaving programs overseas.<\/p>\n

In Friday\u2019s decision, Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented from the majority ruling.<\/p>\n

Earlier in the week, the Supreme Court agreed Monday to hear a case that will determine whether President Donald Trump can remove members of the Federal Trade Commission without cause, a dispute that could redefine the limits of presidential authority and the independence of federal agencies.<\/p>\n

\n
\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

In a brief order, the justices said Trump\u00a0may remove<\/a>\u00a0FTC Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter while the case is pending. Arguments are scheduled for December, and the stay allowing her removal will remain in effect until the court issues a ruling.<\/p>\n

The case asks whether statutory protections against removing FTC commissioners violate the separation of powers and whether the court\u2019s 1935 decision upholding such protections should be overturned. It will also examine whether lower federal courts can block removals, as they have in cases involving Trump\u2019s dismissal of Democratic appointees.<\/p>\n

The high court\u2019s left wing \u2013 Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson \u2013 dissented, with Kagan writing that the order effectively gives the president \u201cfull control\u201d over independent agencies that Congress intended to shield from political influence.<\/p>\n

\u201cHe may now remove \u2014 so says the majority, though Congress said differently \u2014 any member he wishes, for any reason or no reason at all. And he may thereby extinguish the agencies\u2019 bipartisanship and independence,\u201d she wrote.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n