A federal judge in the Washington D.C. area has prohibited the Trump administration from unilaterally cutting approximately $12 billion in U.S. foreign aid funding. This funding was approved by Congress and is set to expire at the end of this month.
U.S. District Judge Amir Ali ruled on Wednesday that the Trump administration's refusal to disburse these aid funds likely violates a U.S. law governing federal agency decision-making processes. Previously, Ali had halted the government's fund freeze based on the constitutional principle of "separation of powers," but after a divided appellate court panel overturned that injunction, Ali issued this latest ruling based on other legal grounds.
In his ruling, Ali wrote that the Trump administration "failed to provide any justification to overturn the fundamental principle that 'Congressional appropriations must be executed,'" and determined that the government's decision to freeze funds violated the Administrative Procedure Act.
The Justice Department notified Ali on Thursday that it would appeal the ruling. If the appeal fails, the Justice Department is expected to quickly take the case to the U.S. Supreme Court. Unless the court issues other rulings, and the remaining agencies of the State Department and USAID fail to at least finalize funding usage plans (the "obligation" process), the funds will expire after September 30th.
The Justice Department previously stated in court documents that it needed the court to clarify its requirements for handling these funds by September 2nd to allow sufficient time to develop plans, negotiate with foreign governments, and submit notifications to Congress before the deadline. Ali noted in his ruling that if the government is concerned about being unable to comply with his ruling in time, he could separately issue an order extending the September 30th fund expiration deadline.
Currently, multiple nonprofit organizations and businesses have filed lawsuits demanding that the Trump administration disburse approximately $30 billion in foreign aid funding approved by Congress over the past several years. In recent weeks, the dispute has gradually narrowed to focus on funding approved by Congress in 2024 legislation—funding that could expire before the case is fully resolved. Plaintiffs can continue pursuing claims related to other affected funding.
Shortly before Ali issued this ruling, former President Donald Trump had requested that Congress rescind over $4 billion in foreign aid funding set to expire this year, including $3.2 billion from the 2024 appropriations bill covered by the latest ruling.
Trump's "pocket rescission" maneuver was strategically timed: if Congress takes no action before the end of September, he may be able to avoid disbursing these funds. This move is widely viewed as a test of whether Trump can use this method to bypass legislative authority.
Regarding the government's assertion that "judges are acting as supervisors of U.S. fund usage," Ali rejected this characterization. He stated in his ruling that the executive branch retains decision-making authority over specific fund usage methods.
The related cases are: "Global Health Council v. Trump" (Case No.: 25-cv-402) and "AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition v. Department of State" (Case No.: 25-cv-400), both being heard by the U.S. Federal District Court for the District of Columbia (Washington D.C.).