A federal appeals court has made a significant decision that allows the Trump administration to proceed with cutting billions in foreign aid funding this year. In a 2-1 ruling on Wednesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit overturned a lower court's decision that had previously prohibited these drastic reductions to USAID funding, which had already received approval from Congress.
The appeals court sidestepped the critical question of whether the proposed cuts to foreign aid were constitutional. Instead, the judges determined that the nonprofits that brought the lawsuit against the Trump administration did not have the standing to pursue the case. Judges Karen Henderson and Gregory Katsas, who were appointed by Presidents George H. W. Bush and Donald Trump respectively, concluded that only the head of the Government Accountability Office holds the authority to initiate a lawsuit under the Impoundment Control Act.
The majority opinion stated, "The district court erred in granting that relief because the grantees lack a cause of action to press their claims." This ruling is significant, as it emphasizes the limitations placed on organizations seeking to challenge governmental actions regarding foreign aid.
The lawsuit concerning USAID funding marked one of the initial legal victories for nonprofits opposing the Trump administration's policies. The administration had issued an order to suspend grants that did not align with the president's priorities. In February, U.S. District Judge Amir Ali granted a temporary restraining order to block Trump's executive order from taking effect. This decision was subsequently upheld by both the D.C. Circuit Court and the United States Supreme Court, denying the Trump administration's request to block the enforcement of the restraining order.
In a dissenting opinion issued alongside the ruling, Judge Florence Pan, appointed by President Biden, expressed her concerns regarding the potential unconstitutionality of the funding cuts. She criticized her colleagues for overlooking the implications that these cuts could have on the rule of law and the overall structure of the government. Judge Pan stated, "At bottom, the court's acquiescence in and facilitation of the Executive's unlawful behavior derails the 'carefully crafted system of checked and balanced power' that serves as the 'greatest security against tyranny — the accumulation of excessive authority in a single Branch.'
This ruling not only affects the distribution of foreign aid but also raises important questions about the balance of power within the U.S. government and the ability of nonprofits to challenge executive actions effectively.
