Judge Blocks Trump Administration’s Freeze on Foreign Aid, Orders Funds to Resume
A federal judge has ordered the Trump administration to temporarily lift its freeze on foreign aid funding, citing the significant harm the abrupt halt has caused to nonprofits, contractors, and global development programs. The ruling marks a major setback for the administration’s efforts to dismantle the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), an institution that has operated for over six decades. The decision, issued Thursday by U.S. District Judge Amir Ali in Washington, comes in response to a lawsuit filed by the AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition and the Global Health Council. These organizations, which rely on USAID funding to carry out health initiatives abroad, argued that the funding cutoff had led to widespread disruptions and job losses. The judge’s order specifically prevents Secretary of State Marco Rubio and other Trump officials from enforcing the stop-work orders that have frozen USAID programs since Trump’s January 20 executive order. That order abruptly halted nearly all U.S. foreign assistance, a move that drew backlash from humanitarian organizations and development experts. In his ruling, Ali criticized the administration’s justification for the freeze, which officials claimed was necessary for reviewing USAID programs to determine which should continue.
“The administration has not offered any explanation for why a blanket suspension of all congressionally appropriated foreign aid, which set off a shockwave and upended contracts with thousands of nonprofit groups, businesses, and others, was a rational precursor to reviewing programs,” Ali wrote. He further stated that government lawyers had failed to justify why small and large businesses, many of which rely on USAID contracts, should be forced to shutter their operations while awaiting the review process. The ruling applies to contracts that were in place before Trump’s executive order, meaning that previously approved funds must now be allowed to resume. The freeze has had widespread consequences both in the U.S. and abroad. Contractors, farmers, and suppliers have gone unpaid for work they had already completed under USAID agreements. The halt has also led to mass layoffs, particularly among humanitarian organizations that rely on consistent funding to sustain long-term projects. The ruling is the second in a series of legal challenges against the administration’s attempt to dismantle USAID. In a separate case on Thursday, U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols extended an earlier order preventing the administration from carrying out its plan to drastically reduce USAID’s workforce. That case revolves around the Trump administration’s efforts to remove all but a small fraction of USAID employees, which many critics argue is an attempt to eliminate the agency altogether.
During a three-hour hearing on Thursday, Nichols questioned the administration’s plans for USAID employees, particularly those stationed in high-risk locations. Government lawyers were unable to provide clear answers about how the agency planned to ensure their safety during the freeze. Nichols ordered them to submit additional court documents detailing their strategy. The impact of the funding freeze has been particularly severe for USAID staff stationed overseas. Affidavits submitted in court describe how some staffers, including those recently posted in the Democratic Republic of Congo, were left without support during a period of violent unrest in the country’s capital. Employees were forced to evacuate with their families without assistance from the agency, leaving them stranded and uncertain about their futures. Additionally, the freeze has left many USAID employees based in Washington without agency funding or housing. Some have reported being on the brink of job loss due to the administration’s sweeping workforce reductions. The Trump administration has defended the funding freeze as part of a broader effort to reform the government’s approach to foreign aid.
The administration, along with Elon Musk—who leads the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), an office focused on cost-cutting initiatives—has claimed that USAID’s operations are wasteful and in need of restructuring. In a legal filing, deputy USAID head Pete Marocco argued that internal resistance had made it impossible for the administration to conduct an effective review of foreign aid programs without first sidelining most of the agency’s staff. He provided no evidence to support the claim. USAID employees have denied accusations of insubordination, stating that they have been doing their best to comply with the administration’s orders despite a lack of clear guidance. Some directives, they say, have come from Musk associates with no formal role in the agency. The situation has prompted Democratic lawmakers to intervene, warning that the Trump administration is attempting to dismantle USAID before Congress or the courts can stop it. Some argue that Trump lacks the legal authority to unilaterally shut down USAID or terminate its programs without congressional approval.
However, administration officials maintain that the president’s powers in foreign affairs are vast and largely unreviewable. Government lawyers have suggested that legal challenges to Trump’s executive order will likely face significant hurdles. Despite these assertions, the court rulings indicate that the legal battle over USAID’s future is far from over. While Thursday’s decision is a temporary measure, it forces the administration to resume funding for existing contracts, providing relief to organizations and businesses affected by the freeze. As litigation continues, USAID workers and global aid organizations remain in limbo, uncertain about the long-term implications of the administration’s efforts to reshape foreign assistance.
The outcome of these legal challenges will determine whether USAID can continue its mission or whether Trump’s policies will fundamentally alter America’s role in international development.
