Trump Appeals to Supreme Court for Billions in Foreign Aid Cuts

Sat Sep 13 2025 11:08:25 GMT+0300 (Eastern European Summer Time)

In a significant legal maneuver, President Trump has petitioned the Supreme Court to allow the withholding of over $4 billion in foreign aid previously allocated by Congress, citing separation of powers concerns.

The Trump administration is pushing for an emergency order from the Supreme Court to withhold more than $4 billion of foreign aid already designated by Congress. Following a lower court's ruling that necessitated the spending of these funds, Solicitor General D John Sauer argued that the injunction threatens executive power in foreign affairs. This move represents a rare attempt to claw back previously allocated funding and has garnered legal challenges from nonprofit groups reliant on foreign assistance. This latest action could lead to significant implications for U.S. foreign policy and aid distribution.

The Trump administration is seeking an emergency order from the U.S. Supreme Court to withhold more than $4 billion in foreign aid, previously allocated by Congress. This unusual legal move comes in light of a lower court ruling affirming the government's obligation to spend the allocated funds.

Solicitor General D John Sauer, in his submission to the Supreme Court, emphasized that the lower court's ruling poses a significant threat to the separation of powers doctrine. He articulated that the President's ability to speak with a unified voice in foreign affairs is compromised when forced by the court to go against his administration's goals.

This legal tussle follows Trump's previous attempts to use a legislative mechanism to retract foreign aid, claiming that several programs do not align with his administration’s objectives. His administration has faced a growing backlash for its foreign aid policies, including a notable reduction in the operational capacity of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).

On August 28, Trump informed the House of Representatives that he would not allocate billions in foreign aid designated earlier that fiscal year. This decision impacts funding for various international programs, including approximately $3 billion earmarked for USAID and additional funds for international diplomacy and democracy promotion.

The urgency of the Supreme Court's decision is magnified given that funds may go unspent, due to restrictions on legislative action so late in the budget cycle. Critics, including a coalition of nonprofits and businesses that benefit from foreign aid, have mounted legal challenges against the administration’s plan, marking a striking precedent in the use of executive power to unilaterally manage foreign aid.

This presidential maneuver of clawing back foreign aid funds has not been employed in nearly half a century, illustrating the contentious relationship between the legislative and executive branches regarding fiscal authority.

As the Supreme Court prepares to deliberate over this significant case, the potential ramifications for U.S. foreign aid policy remain a topic of considerable concern among various stakeholders.