In a recent legal development, a federal judge determined that President Donald Trump exceeded his constitutional limits by halting nearly all U.S. humanitarian and development funding abroad. This decision signifies that the administration can no longer simply withhold the significant funds, valued at tens of billions, allocated by Congress for foreign aid. However, the judge, Amir H. Ali, did not mandate that Trump officials resume the contracts associated with the halted U.S. aid and development projects globally.
This ruling came on the heels of an announcement by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who stated that the administration had recently completed a major reduction of the programs under the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), eliminating 83% of these initiatives. As per Rubio, the remaining aid efforts will be transferred to the State Department’s management.
Rubio made this announcement publicly on social media, acknowledging the efforts of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) team led by Elon Musk, and the State Department’s determination in enacting what he referred to as a historic reform in American foreign aid.
The reform followed an executive order issued by Trump on January 20th, which instituted a freeze on foreign assistance funding and called for a reassessment of U.S. development work overseas. Trump criticized foreign aid efforts for being inefficient and promoting agendas that opposed U.S. core interests. Rubio’s social media post reported that the review had concluded, resulting in the elimination of approximately 5,200 of USAID’s 6,200 programs, an action he justified by claiming these programs did not benefit, and sometimes hindered, U.S. national interests.
This move has sparked significant criticism among Democratic lawmakers and others who argue that the shutdown of federally funded programs is illegal and requires Congressional authorization. Judge Ali asserted that the President does not possess unilateral authority to disregard the $60 billion earmarked by Congress for foreign aid and development.
“The constitutional power over whether to spend foreign aid is not the President’s own; it belongs to Congress,” Judge Ali articulated, further noting that the administration’s interpretation of executive power has been consistently opposed by the Supreme Court.
Nevertheless, Judge Ali declined requests from non-profit organizations and businesses to reinstate the foreign aid contracts that were abruptly canceled. He clarified that it remains within the administration’s purview to make decisions regarding specific contracts rather than the courts.
Furthermore, Judge Ali ordered that the administration settle approximately $2 billion owed to aid organizations and contractors, requiring them to process at least 300 back payments a day for past dues up to mid-February.
Despite the administration’s claims of maintaining essential life-saving programs during the aid freeze, reports from USAID staff and associated groups indicate that all payments through USAID were halted until recently, with payment systems being deactivated by DOGE. The Supreme Court had previously rejected the administration’s efforts to appeal the case.
Observers and USAID advocates argue that the drastic reduction of USAID programs has obfuscated the actual U.S. foreign aid priorities endorsed by the Trump administration. Andrew Natsios, former USAID administrator under President George W. Bush, critiqued the apparent patterns of rejecting democracy, civil society, NGO programs, health initiatives, and emergency responses.
On a broader political level, Republicans have signaled support for foreign assistance that aligns closely with a more restricted definition of U.S. national interests. This dismantling of USAID’s role diverges sharply from longstanding approaches that associated foreign aid with national security benefits such as regional stabilization, economic development, and forging international goodwill.
The State Department recently indicated in a court submission that it plans to discontinue over 90% of USAID programs, although Rubio’s figures suggest a slightly smaller scale of cuts.
In the aftermath of President Trump’s order, significant actions were taken by appointees and staff, including mass layoffs and enforced leaves, resulting in an abrupt cessation of payments and termination of thousands of contracts. This situation has left many USAID workers and contractors abroad, caught in limbo while waiting for back payments and travel funds necessary to return to the U.S.
The administration has set a deadline of April 6 for USAID employees overseas to relocate back to the States on government expenses, as per recent internal communications. This timeline places pressure on affected personnel to make rapid life adjustments, such as relocating families, selling properties, or negotiating lease agreements after extended periods outside the country.
