Judge cautions Trump administration against circumventing court order to release foreign aid
A judge has ruled that officials are not in contempt of court; however, they are unable to implement any wide-ranging holds on payments.
TroibNews 
A federal judge issued a firm warning to the Trump administration regarding compliance with a court order to unfreeze foreign-aid funding, but refrained from holding officials in contempt for their continued delays on some of the funds.
In a seven-page order, U.S. District Court Judge Amir Ali expressed concern over complaints from aid organizations indicating that a significant amount of funding remained frozen, despite his Feb. 13 order that lifted the blanket freeze implemented by the Trump administration.
Peter Marocco, who is responsible for overseeing the administration's foreign-aid overhaul, submitted a declaration to the court on Tuesday, suggesting that most payments were still on hold. However, Marocco asserted that the administration was not extending the blanket freeze to withhold these payments; instead, he claimed that there were separate authorities, derived from the aid contracts or federal law, allowing officials to pause those payments.
This situation led aid groups to seek contempt charges against Marocco and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, accusing the officials of “brazen defiance” of the court's order.
In his new ruling, Ali asserted that his Feb. 13 restraining order was "clear" and cautioned officials at the U.S. Agency for International Development and the State Department against using different labels or directives to circumvent the court's mandate.
“The Court was not inviting Defendants to continue the suspension while they reviewed contracts and legal authorities to come up with a new, post-hoc rationalization for the en masse suspension,” Ali, appointed by President Joe Biden, stated. “To the extent Defendants have continued the blanket suspension, they are ordered to immediately cease it.”
Ali clarified that the agencies could suspend or terminate “particular contracts” based on a “good-faith, individualized assessment,” but could not halt funding during broader evaluations.
The restraining order, according to Ali, “does not permit Defendants to simply continue their blanket suspension of congressionally appropriated foreign aid pending a review of the agreements for whether they should be continued or terminated. That is the very action that the Court temporarily enjoined.”
A lawyer representing the foreign-aid organizations with Public Citizen remarked: “The court has, twice now, ordered State and USAID to resume funding vital humanitarian programs. The government's choice is clear: Comply immediately or risk constitutional crisis.”
Despite Ali’s latest ruling, it seems unlikely to resolve the ongoing controversy regarding the Trump administration's adherence to the restraining order. Following the ruling, the foreign-aid groups submitted a new motion indicating that six member organizations had not received payments on outstanding invoices within the week since the judge's decision.
“Plaintiffs remain in largely the same position they were before the Court issued its order: their owed funds have not been disbursed and they continue to suffer the same irreparable harms,” the groups' lawyers stated. They pointed out that the layoffs of many USAID staff and a decrease in the number of offices processing invoices “are having the predictable result of slowing payment processing to a standstill.”
Additionally, the groups presented the judge with an email from a State Department official sent five days after the restraining order, which indicated that all grants were still on hold at Rubio’s instruction.
“Secretary Rubio has implemented a 15-day disbursement pause on all $15.9B worth of grants at the State Department,” the email, dated Feb. 18, stated, in accordance with a declaration filed with the court.
Ramin Sohrabi contributed to this report for TROIB News
In a seven-page order, U.S. District Court Judge Amir Ali expressed concern over complaints from aid organizations indicating that a significant amount of funding remained frozen, despite his Feb. 13 order that lifted the blanket freeze implemented by the Trump administration.
Peter Marocco, who is responsible for overseeing the administration's foreign-aid overhaul, submitted a declaration to the court on Tuesday, suggesting that most payments were still on hold. However, Marocco asserted that the administration was not extending the blanket freeze to withhold these payments; instead, he claimed that there were separate authorities, derived from the aid contracts or federal law, allowing officials to pause those payments.
This situation led aid groups to seek contempt charges against Marocco and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, accusing the officials of “brazen defiance” of the court's order.
In his new ruling, Ali asserted that his Feb. 13 restraining order was "clear" and cautioned officials at the U.S. Agency for International Development and the State Department against using different labels or directives to circumvent the court's mandate.
“The Court was not inviting Defendants to continue the suspension while they reviewed contracts and legal authorities to come up with a new, post-hoc rationalization for the en masse suspension,” Ali, appointed by President Joe Biden, stated. “To the extent Defendants have continued the blanket suspension, they are ordered to immediately cease it.”
Ali clarified that the agencies could suspend or terminate “particular contracts” based on a “good-faith, individualized assessment,” but could not halt funding during broader evaluations.
The restraining order, according to Ali, “does not permit Defendants to simply continue their blanket suspension of congressionally appropriated foreign aid pending a review of the agreements for whether they should be continued or terminated. That is the very action that the Court temporarily enjoined.”
A lawyer representing the foreign-aid organizations with Public Citizen remarked: “The court has, twice now, ordered State and USAID to resume funding vital humanitarian programs. The government's choice is clear: Comply immediately or risk constitutional crisis.”
Despite Ali’s latest ruling, it seems unlikely to resolve the ongoing controversy regarding the Trump administration's adherence to the restraining order. Following the ruling, the foreign-aid groups submitted a new motion indicating that six member organizations had not received payments on outstanding invoices within the week since the judge's decision.
“Plaintiffs remain in largely the same position they were before the Court issued its order: their owed funds have not been disbursed and they continue to suffer the same irreparable harms,” the groups' lawyers stated. They pointed out that the layoffs of many USAID staff and a decrease in the number of offices processing invoices “are having the predictable result of slowing payment processing to a standstill.”
Additionally, the groups presented the judge with an email from a State Department official sent five days after the restraining order, which indicated that all grants were still on hold at Rubio’s instruction.
“Secretary Rubio has implemented a 15-day disbursement pause on all $15.9B worth of grants at the State Department,” the email, dated Feb. 18, stated, in accordance with a declaration filed with the court.
Ramin Sohrabi contributed to this report for TROIB News
