Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. on Thursday temporarily stayed a lower-court order that had required the Trump administration to spend about $5 billion in foreign assistance, giving the Supreme Court more time to consider the administration’s request to keep the funds frozen.
The administrative stay pauses enforcement of the order while the justices weigh legal arguments over whether the executive branch may withhold funds that Congress appropriated for foreign aid, U.N. peacekeeping and democracy-promotion programs. Roberts set a deadline for plaintiffs to respond by noon Friday and indicated the temporary halt could be replaced by a different ruling later in the week.
The dispute centers on roughly $4 billion to $5 billion that the administration says is inconsistent with President Donald Trump’s “America First” foreign policy and therefore may be withheld. Administration lawyers have argued in court filings that certain appropriations are contrary to U.S. foreign policy objectives, and the White House has used a budget maneuver known as a “pocket rescission” to seek to block about $4 billion without a new act of Congress.
Aid groups sued to compel the administration to spend the money. In an August decision, a federal district court rejected the administration’s withholding of the funds and ordered the government to disburse the appropriated amounts, concluding the executive must follow the terms of appropriations statutes unless Congress changes them. The administration then sought emergency relief from the Supreme Court, which Roberts granted temporarily.
The dispute is set against a broader fiscal backdrop: Congress allocated billions for foreign assistance last year, including about $11 billion that must be spent or obligated by Sept. 30, the final day of fiscal 2025, or the funds will expire. The administration has signaled it planned to spend some of the contested funds, saying in filings earlier this year that it intended to obligate about $6.5 billion of the disputed amounts while challenging other portions.
The legal fight also reflects policy moves by the administration affecting the U.S. Agency for International Development. Earlier this year, the president took steps aimed at dismantling elements of USAID, prompting criticism from lawmakers and aid organizations that warned the changes would undermine U.S. foreign assistance programs.
The Supreme Court’s temporary order does not resolve the underlying legal questions, which involve separation-of-powers and appropriations law. If the justices deny the administration’s request, the lower-court order to spend the funds would be reinstated; if the stay is extended or the administration prevails, the government would be permitted to continue withholding the disputed amounts while the case proceeds.
The court’s move follows a string of high-profile funding disputes brought by the administration in recent months. Reuters contributed reporting.