In a brief ruling on Wednesday, the U.S. Supreme Court denied the Trump administration’s request to block a lower court’s order requiring the payment of nearly $2 billion in frozen USAID funds.

The decision, which effectively prevents the administration from further delaying payments to international aid groups and contractors for completed projects, marks a significant rebuke of the executive branch’s recent policies on foreign spending.

The case originated after President Donald Trump froze approximately $1.9 billion in USAID payments, prompting aid groups to seek judicial relief. In its one-paragraph opinion, the Supreme Court noted that the February 26 deadline imposed by U.S. District Judge Amir Ali had already passed. The Court directed the district court to provide new instructions, stating, “Given that the deadline in the challenged order has now passed, and in light of the ongoing preliminary injunction proceedings, the District Court should clarify what obligations the Government must fulfill to ensure compliance with the temporary restraining order, with due regard for the feasibility of any compliance timelines.”

Chief Justice John Roberts had earlier agreed to pause Judge Ali’s order—which had required the Trump administration to pay all outstanding invoices by 11:59 p.m.—after the Justice Department argued that the deadline was “impossible” to meet. Although Roberts did not elaborate on his decision to pause the lower court’s order, his action prevented foreign aid groups from immediately pursuing a motion of civil contempt against the administration—a legal strategy that could have accelerated the recovery of the unpaid funds.

Acting U.S. Solicitor General Sarah Harris argued in a court filing that while the aid groups’ claims were likely legitimate, the timeline imposed by the district court was neither logistically nor technically feasible. She further contended that enforcing such a deadline without consideration for the complexities of the payment system intruded upon the executive branch’s constitutionally granted foreign affairs powers.

The plaintiffs countered that the Trump administration had made no progress toward meeting the February 26 deadline, emphasizing that all outstanding invoices had been approved by USAID’s front-line managers well before the deadline passed. They accused the administration of dismantling critical payment systems and purging essential USAID staff, actions that they say have created significant bottlenecks in the process.

This legal battle unfolds against the backdrop of President Trump’s broader plan to cut foreign aid, which includes proposals to slash USAID contracts by up to 90% and eliminate an additional $60 billion in foreign spending. Critics warn that such drastic measures risk undermining U.S. influence abroad and could lead to economic and security repercussions, as diminished U.S. support may open the door for increased corruption and create opportunities for geopolitical rivals.

As the Supreme Court’s decision awaits further instructions from the district court, international aid groups and contractors continue to monitor developments closely, hopeful that a revised timeline will facilitate the long-delayed payments.

Copied