federal appeals court has handed President Donald Trump a significant legal victory, overturning a lower court order that had forced his administration to resume billions of dollars in foreign aid payments.
In a 2–1 decision issued Wednesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that the two nonprofit organizations challenging Trump’s aid freeze — the AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition and the Journalism Development Network — did not have the legal standing required to press their claims.
Background of the Case
On January 20, the day of his second inauguration, President Trump signed an executive order pausing all U.S. foreign aid for 90 days. The move was part of a broader effort to scale back the role of USAID, the country’s primary foreign assistance agency. Actions included placing large portions of USAID staff on leave and exploring whether to fold the agency into the State Department.
The nonprofits that sued argued the pause was unlawful and harmed humanitarian programs already approved by Congress. In April, U.S. District Judge Amir Ali — a Biden appointee — sided with the plaintiffs and ordered the release of nearly $2 billion in pending aid to overseas partners.
The Appeals Court’s Ruling
Writing for the majority, U.S. Circuit Judge Karen Henderson, appointed by President George H.W. Bush, concluded that the plaintiffs “lack a cause of action to press their claims,” meaning they could not meet the legal threshold for an injunction. Henderson emphasized that under federal law, only the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) has the authority to directly challenge a president’s decision to withhold foreign aid.
The ruling was joined by Circuit Judge Gregory Katsas, a Trump appointee.
Importantly, the decision did not address the underlying constitutional question of whether Trump’s aid freeze infringes on Congress’s power over federal spending — leaving that debate unresolved.
The Dissent
Circuit Judge Florence Pan, appointed by President Biden, issued a sharp dissent. She argued that the ruling effectively gave the executive branch a free hand to bypass laws passed by Congress, weakening the constitutional system of checks and balances.
“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,” Pan wrote.
Reaction from the White House
A spokesperson for the Office of Management and Budget welcomed the decision, calling it a win for the administration’s ability to manage federal spending without interference.
“This ruling stops radical left dark money groups from maliciously interfering with the president’s ability to spend responsibly,” the spokesperson said.
With the injunction lifted, the Trump administration’s foreign aid pause remains in place — a policy shift that could reshape America’s role in global humanitarian efforts.
