Administration's foreign aid budget will be reduced significantly following the court ruling in favor of the Trump administration.
In a recent ruling, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has given the green light for the Trump administration to withhold billions of dollars in foreign aid, including crucial funds managed by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). This decision comes after a lower court's temporary restraining order was partially vacated, allowing the freeze on the funds to remain in place.
The ruling, handed down on August 13, 2025, was a divided panel decision. The plaintiffs in the case, international aid groups seeking to restore the funding, were found to lack legal standing to bring the case. As a result, the administration's freeze on the funds remains effective for now.
The administration's actions began with an executive order issued on President Trump's first day in his second term, which aimed to freeze foreign aid spending and dismantle USAID, which previously managed around $30 billion annually in global health and development programs. The funds in question include nearly $4 billion for global health programs through September and over $6 billion for HIV/AIDS programs through 2028.
The court's decision did not rule on the merits of whether the administration unlawfully infringed on Congress’s spending powers. However, it is important to note that both the D.C. circuit court and the United States Supreme Court sided with the nonprofits, denying a request from the Trump administration to block an order enforcing the TRO.
Judge Florence Pan, a Biden appointee, criticized her colleagues for ignoring the concern that the funding cuts were unconstitutional in a dissenting opinion issued with Wednesday's ruling. She wrote that the court's acquiescence in and facilitation of the Executive's unlawful behavior derails the system of checked and balanced power.
Human rights and global health organizations, including Physicians for Human Rights and the Open Society Justice Initiative, continue to fight the cuts through ongoing litigation and amicus briefs filed in support of restoring funding. They emphasize that the freeze and dismantling of USAID have caused severe and potentially catastrophic harm to global health efforts, with reports of harm such as increased HIV transmission and loss of maternal health services in affected countries.
The current status of the lawsuit challenging the Trump administration's cuts to foreign aid funding, including USAID funding, is that the administration can continue to withhold billions of dollars in foreign aid. The legal challenges and advocacy efforts remain ongoing, highlighting significant global health consequences from the cuts and agency dismantling.
The article does not provide information about the possible activation of the National Guard in DC outside of the context of the police department being put under federal control. It is important to note that the court's ruling did not address the substantive question of whether the cuts to USAID funding were constitutional.
- The court's ruling, allowing the Trump administration to withhold billions in foreign aid, has sparked debate and criticism, with Judge Florence Pan expressing concern that the funding cuts could be unconstitutional.
- The current status of the legal challenge against the Trump administration's cuts to foreign aid funding, including USAID funding, shows the ongoing fight by human rights and global health organizations to restore the funding.
- The ongoing litigation and advocacy efforts highlight the potential catastrophic harm to global health efforts caused by the freeze and dismantling of USAID, including increased HIV transmission and loss of maternal health services in affected countries.
- Despite the court's decision not ruling on the merits of whether the administration unlawfully infringed on Congress’s spending powers, the administration can continue to withhold billions of dollars in foreign aid, with the political implications of this decision extending to the realm of policy-and-legislation and general-news.
