The Supreme Court on Tuesday granted the Trump administration emergency relief to temporarily freeze nearly $5 billion in foreign aid that President Donald Trump sought to cancel in a late-year “pocket rescission.” Chief Justice John Roberts issued a one-page order partially staying a Sept. 3 decision by U.S. District Judge Amir Ali that had required $11.5 billion in congressionally appropriated funds to be dispersed.
Roberts’ brief order blocks enforcement of Ali’s injunction with respect to foreign aid spending “subject to the President’s August 28, 2025 rescission proposal currently pending before Congress,” the high court said. The stay will remain in place while the Supreme Court considers the administration’s emergency application.
The rescission notice, transmitted Aug. 28 to House Speaker Mike Johnson, sought to cancel about $3.2 billion in United States Agency for International Development development assistance, $322 million from the USAID-State Department Democracy Fund, $521 million in State Department contributions to international organizations, $393 million for State Department peacekeeping activities and $445 million in separately budgeted peacekeeping aid.
The administration presented the rescission so late in the fiscal year that, under the procedural mechanics it invoked, the cuts would take effect unless Congress acted—a maneuver rarely used by a president and not deployed in nearly 50 years. The funds had been earmarked for several nonprofit organizations and foreign governments.
Judge Ali, an appointee of President Joe Biden, had ruled last week that the Impoundment Control Act requires affirmative congressional action to rescind appropriations and that the president’s transmission of a special message alone does not operate to cancel previously enacted spending. “To date, Congress has not responded to the President’s rescission proposal by rescinding the funds,” Ali wrote in his ruling.
Nonprofit groups led by the Global Health Council sued the administration, arguing the funding freeze violated federal law and jeopardized urgent health and humanitarian programs overseas. They had sought to block the rescission and force distribution of the appropriated funds.
Solicitor General D. John Sauer urged the Supreme Court to intervene, telling the justices that Ali’s injunction was “an unlawful injunction that precipitates an unnecessary emergency and needless interbranch conflict.” In its one-page action on Tuesday, the court asked the nonprofit plaintiffs to file a response to the administration’s emergency application by Friday as the justices determine whether to grant further relief or take the case for full briefing.
The Supreme Court’s temporary stay preserves the status quo while it considers competing legal arguments about the separation of powers and the statutory framework governing presidential rescissions of appropriations. If the court ultimately lifts the stay, Ali’s order would require the disbursement of the affected funds. If the court sustains the stay and later rules for the administration, the rescission could take effect unless Congress acts to block it.
The dispute adds to ongoing litigation and political debate over executive authority to withhold or rescind funds approved by Congress. The case’s procedural timetable is likely to be expedited because of appropriations deadlines and the practical impacts on foreign-assistance programs that advocates say rely on the appropriated money to operate.