4 LAWYER MONTHLY MARCH 2025 authority. They warned that halting funds for disease prevention, including HIV/AIDS programs, would have devastating consequences. Chief Justice John Roberts joined Justices Barrett, Kagan, Sotomayor, and Jackson in the majority, while Justices Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh dissented. Alito criticized the ruling as judicial overreach, arguing the Court was improperly interfering in executive decisions on foreign aid. Despite the legal challenges, the Trump administration defended its actions, stating it was reviewing payment requests but could not meet the deadline set by U.S. District Judge Amir Ali. Additionally, the administration revealed efforts to terminate over 90% of USAID foreign aid awards, putting nearly $57 billion in funding at risk. The Supreme Court’s decision does not resolve the issue, as lower courts must now determine how to enforce the ruling. The case underscores ongoing tensions between executive power, judicial oversight, and the future of U.S. foreign aid. The aid freeze, imposed in January 2024, affected billions managed by the State Department and USAID, significantly disrupting global health programs. Nonprofits, including the AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition and the Global Health Council, sued, arguing the freeze violated federal law and undermined Congress’s spending Supreme Court Rejects Trump’s Request to Keep Foreign Aid Frozen The U.S. Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, rejected the Trump administration’s request to keep billions in foreign aid frozen but did not mandate an immediate release. The ruling allows lower courts to enforce the decision while the White House continues its legal challenge. Read the full news story at: www.lawyer-monthly.com NEWS
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy Mjk3Mzkz