MAJOR TRUMP WIN: Supreme Court Rules President Trump Has Authority to Withhold BILLIONS in Foreign Aid

Go to Article

🚨

The Supreme Court on Friday cleared the way for the Trump administration to withhold nearly $4 billion in foreign-aid funding. Over a dissent by the court’s three Democratic appointees, the justices paused a ruling by a federal judge in Washington, D.C., that would have required the government to commit to spending the funds by Sept. 30, the end of the government’s fiscal year. It was the third time that the Trump administration had come to the Supreme Court seeking temporary relief in the challenge to the funding freeze.(SCOTUS blog)

Of course they ruled for the Trump administration. All these absurd lawsuits are all to stop the President from saving this country from the party of terrorism.

SCOTUS Shuts Down Lower Court Blockade On Trump’s Foreign Aid Cuts (For Now)
By: Shawn Fleetwood, The Federalist, September 26, 2025

The U.S. Supreme Court blocked a lower court order on Friday afternoon that attempted to prevent President Trump from cutting billions of dollars’ worth of foreign grants.

In a 6-3 decision, the high court placed a temporary stay on a preliminary injunction issued by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. That order tried to prevent Trump from cutting $4 billion in foreign aid approved by Congress (a “pocket recession”) under the Impoundment Control Act.

The Trump administration filed its emergency request with the justices after its application for relief was denied by the D.C. Court of Appeals.

Associate Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson would have denied the administration’s request.

In its Friday order, SCOTUS determined that the federal government “at this early stage, has made a sufficient showing that the Impoundment Control Act precludes respondents’ suit, brought pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act, to enforce the appropriations at issue here.” The majority further noted that the administration “has also made a sufficient showing that mandamus relief is unavailable to respondents,” and that “on the record before the Court, the asserted harms to the Executive’s conduct of foreign affairs appear to outweigh the potential harm faced by respondents.”

“This order should not be read as a final determination on the merits. The relief granted by the Court today reflects our preliminary view, consistent with the standards for interim relief,” the majority stated.

Writing for the dissent, Kagan recognized the majority’s admission that the court’s order is “only a ‘preliminary view’ of the issues raised” in the case, but claimed that “even at that, the majority goes too far.” She further argued that the administration “has not met our standard for emergency relief — the appropriately high bar we have erected because a stay like this one disrupts ‘the ordinary processes of administration and judicial review.’”
Continued……



Comment on this Article Via Your Disqus Account