WASHINGTON: The US Supreme Court sided again on Friday (Sep 26) with Donald Trump, allowing his administration to withhold about US$4 billion in foreign aid authorised by Congress for the current fiscal year as the Republican president pursues his "America First" agenda.The justices for now blocked an order by Washington-based US District Judge Amir Ali that had directed the administration to promptly take steps to spend the aid at issue in the dispute. Ali's decision came in a lawsuit by aid groups challenging the administration's action.The Supreme Court has a 6-3 conservative majority, and the court's three liberal justices dissented.COURT QUESTIONS LEGAL CHALLENGEThe court said in its unsigned order that the aid groups that sued the administration likely lacked the legal authority to bring their challenge. It also expressed concerns that ruling against Trump threatened to impair his power to conduct foreign affairs.The case raised questions about the degree to which a president has the authority to rescind funds Congress has appropriated for programs that do not align with his policies.The administration said in court papers that the money it targeted was "contrary to US foreign policy," reflecting Trump's effort to scale back assistance abroad as part of an "America First" agenda. Trump has also moved to dismantle the US Agency for International Development, the main foreign aid agency.Fed’s Lisa Cook urges US Supreme Court to block Trump’s attempt to remove herGoogle asks US Supreme Court to freeze app store injunction in Epic Games caseFOREIGN AID AT STAKEThe US government's 2025 fiscal year ends on Sep 30. The US$4 billion in aid spending at issue was intended by Congress for foreign aid, United Nations peacekeeping operations and democracy-promotion efforts overseas.Congress budgeted billions of dollars in foreign aid last year, about US$11 billion of which was set to expire at the end of the fiscal year.The administration sought to block the US$4 billion through a "pocket rescission," an unusual move aimed at avoiding spending funds appropriated by Congress. The US Constitution gives Congress the power of the purse.Boxes of drugs delivered by the now-dismantled United States Agency for International Development (USAID) are seen amid medical supply shortages in a pharmacy storeroom at Lodwar County Referral Hospital in Lodwar, Kenya on Apr 1, 2025. (Photo: AFP/Luis TATO)DISSENT WARNS OF SEPARATION OF POWERS BREACHThe liberal justices, in a dissent written by Justice Elena Kagan, said Friday's ruling was an affront to the principle that power is separated between the three branches of government. They noted that the Constitution "gives Congress the power to make spending decisions through the enactment of appropriations laws.""If those laws require obligation of the money, and if Congress has not by rescission or other action relieved the Executive of that duty, then the Executive must comply," Kagan wrote in a dissent joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson.Ali ruled on Sep 3 that the administration cannot simply choose to withhold the money, and that it must comply with appropriations laws passed by Congress unless lawmakers change them.US Supreme Court to hear Trump tariffs case on Nov 5US Supreme Court's decision on tariffs may extend market volatility: StrategistSUPREME COURT SIDES WITH TRUMPJustice Department lawyers told the Supreme Court that Ali's injunction raised "a grave and urgent threat to the separation of powers.""It would be self-defeating and senseless for the executive branch to obligate the very funds that it is asking Congress to rescind," they wrote.Trump budget director Russell Vought has argued that the president can withhold funds for 45 days after requesting a rescission, which would run out the clock until the end of the fiscal year. The White House said the tactic was last used in 1977.Some legal experts have said Trump's attempted clawback of billions of dollars in congressionally appropriated funds in this manner had no historical parallel.The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in a 2-1 ruling on Sep 5 declined to halt Ali's order, prompting the administration's request to the Supreme Court.In the foreign aid case, the Supreme Court on Sep 9 paused Ali's order while it considered how to proceed.The administration has repeatedly asked the justices this year to intervene to allow implementation of Trump policies impeded by lower courts. The Supreme Court has sided with the administration in almost every case it has been asked to review since Trump returned to the presidency in January.In an earlier iteration of the foreign aid case, the court in a 5-4 vote in March declined to let the administration withhold payment of some US$2 billion to aid organisations for work they had already performed.Sign up for our newslettersGet our pick of top stories and thought-provoking articles in your inboxSubscribe hereGet the CNA appStay updated with notifications for breaking news and our best storiesDownload hereGet WhatsApp alertsJoin our channel for the top reads for the day on your preferred chat appJoin here