Day 38: Update on Litigation, Courts and Legal Actions
Honestly, we're fucked. HOWEVER... we are not giving up! Don't give up power voluntarily. Push back everywhere. Document everything. This coup is not forever.
Legal Actions, Litigation, and Updates from the Courts (02/27/25)
The US courts have been incredibly busy with contractors and implementing partners seeking legal remedies for the damage being caused by the foreign aid freeze. Developments are happening at breakneck speed, so let’s dive into the most recent legal updates below.
Legal Headlines to be Tracking (as of 11:59 pm ET on Feb. 26, 2025)
Who knows what will have happened by the time you read this!
Chief Justice John Roberts pauses order for Trump admin to pay $2 billion in foreign aid by midnight - CNN
Chief Justice John Roberts paused the court order from a lower court ordering the Trump Administration to pay $2 billion in foreign aid by midnight on February 26. This administrative stay does not resolve the underlying questions raised by the case but gives the court a few days to review written arguments in the case. Parties to the complaint have until Friday, February 28, at noon to respond. Analysts note the case will likely put the Supreme Court on a collision course with Trump’s sweeping efforts to consolidate power within the executive branch. This ruling does not indicate how the court will treat the foreign aid freeze; it simply gives them more time to evaluate the arguments.
Judge gives Trump administration one day to pay USAID after flouting court order - Washington Examiner
Judge Amir Ali said Justice Department attorneys could not demonstrate to the court that the government was abiding by the order he imposed this month requiring USAID to unfreeze its funds to pay its outstanding bills. This order comes after Judge Ali had already ordered the Trump administration to pay their bills.
Please note this story has been nullified as a result of the Supreme Court intervention on Wednesday night
Key Takeaways: U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols, who had previously stayed the Trump administration's attempts to reduce the USAID workforce, chose not to extend the temporary stay. This effectively cleared the way for USAID to place thousands on administrative leave. Judge Nichols said the harm asserted by the USAID employees' unions did not warrant emergency relief. USAID employees have been instructed to pick up their belongings from the USAID building on Thursday and Friday.
Trump administration says it’s cutting 90% of USAID foreign aid contracts - The AP
Key Takeaways: The Trump administration said it is eliminating over 90% of USAID foreign aid contracts and $60 billion in overall US assistance worldwide. This announcement puts numbers on its plans to eliminate the majority of US development and humanitarian assistance.
Overview of Court Cases and Efforts
Global Health Council v Trump
A group of for-profit and non-profit organizations that contract with USAID sued the Trump administration over attempts to defund, lay off, or furlough employees and transfer the Agency to the State Department's control. They argued that the administration does not have the authority to unilaterally withhold already appropriated funds under the Constitution.
Most recent update: Plaintiffs filed an emergency renewed motion requesting the government comply with the order. The judge granted this and mandated the government make all payments by midnight on Wednesday, February 26th. The Supreme Court paused this order at 10 pm on Wednesday and gave all parties to the lawsuit until Friday at noon to submit additional paperwork. The court will re-evaluate starting on Friday.
AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition v United States Department of State
The plaintiffs allege that the Executive Order and stop-work orders have been detrimental to their work, forcing them to lay off staff, slash budgets, and impact their ability to carry out their missions. They also allege that the President is usurping legislative authority and the Take Care Clause.* The plaintiffs are seeking a declaration from the court that the suspension of foreign aid is unlawful and an immediate reinstatement of foreign assistance funding.
Most recent update: See the Global Health Council v Trump for updates relevant to this court case.
American Foreign Service Association v Trump
Plaintiffs allege the executive actions to dissolve USAID or merge it with the State Department are unconstitutional violations of the separation of powers and the Take Care Clause and unlawful under the Administrative Procedure Act by exceeding statutory authority, violating the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, and involving arbitrary and capricious abuses of discretion. Plaintiffs are seeking a judgment that the administration's actions are unlawful and unconstitutional, a temporary restraining order, and a preliminary injunction directing the administration to halt efforts to close the agency, restore funding, recall furloughs, and prevent efforts to eliminate more staff. They are also requesting an injunction to prevent the administration from taking action to dissolve USAID without express congressional authorization.
Most recent update: On February 21, a judge issued an order and memo rejecting the preliminary injunction and removing previous temporary restraining orders on these matters. The Just reasoned that the plaintiffs do not face irreparable harm after a series of concessions from Deputy Administrator Marocco and that they could pursue other remedies with administrative bodies.
Personal Services Contractor Association v Trump et al
Plaintiffs challenged Executive Orders and executive actions to effectively suspend US foreign aid and began dismantling USAID. They allege these actions have caused severe disruption, including contractors being locked out of facilities and email, facing eviction overseas, losing access to healthcare, and being unable to carry out humanitarian aid work. They further allege the administration's actions (1) violate the separation of powers, (2) violation of the Take Care Clause, (3) violation of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), and (4) violation of the APA for actions not in accordance with the law.
Most recent update: On February 19, plaintiffs requested a temporary restraining order.
*The Take Care Clause is part of Article II, Section 3 of the US Constitution. It mandates the President must ensure that the laws are faithfully executed. It established both a duty for the President to enforce laws and a limit on presidential power. It requires adherence to the laws passed by Congress
Analysis of Legal Implications of Trump Administration Interactions with Courts
It is clear that the Trump administration is ignoring these court orders on USAID issues and a host of other issues. For more opinions on this matter, see some of the pieces below.
What happens if Trump starts ignoring court rulings? We break it down - NPR
What judges can do if Trump ignores court orders - Newsweek
Trump defying a court order would trigger a constitutional crisis - The Hill
Obeying court orders isn’t optional - Brennan Center for Justice