The lower courts are out to get President Trump and his allies. Trump has one card left.
That’s why the U.S. Supreme Court received an emergency filing from the Trump admin.
President Donald Trump’s administration is once again battling activist judges who are hell-bent on undermining America’s sovereignty by forcing the release of billions in foreign aid to unaccountable global entities. On Tuesday, the Trump team urgently appealed to the Supreme Court to halt this madness before the funds—tens of billions of taxpayer dollars—are squandered on programs that do nothing for hardworking Americans.
The trouble stems from a lower court’s injunction that’s still hanging like a noose around the administration’s neck, even after a D.C. Circuit panel rightly slapped it down in a 2-1 ruling last month. But because the full appeals court hasn’t issued its mandate, the injunction lingers, threatening to drain our coffers dry.
“The funds subject to the injunction comprise tens of billions of dollars, some $12 billion of which would have to be spent before those appropriations expire on September 30,” Solicitor General John Sauer wrote in the emergency application.
This isn’t just bureaucratic red tape—it’s a direct assault on President Trump’s authority to put America first. The government is rushing to the Supreme Court because the D.C. Circuit’s foot-dragging has left the administration “subject to an injunction that the panel held to be deeply erroneous,” as Sauer aptly put it.
It all started when leftist nonprofit groups, whose fat grants were cut off by Trump’s day-one executive order freezing foreign aid, threw a tantrum and sued back in February. These globalist outfits think they have a right to our money, but the D.C. Circuit panel wisely ruled on August 13 that only Congress, via the Government Accountability Office, can challenge such funding decisions—not these unelected activists.
This isn’t the first time the Trump administration has had to beg the Supreme Court for relief from rogue lower courts. Back in February, U.S. District Judge Amir Ali—a Biden holdover—demanded the government cough up $2 billion in foreign aid within a measly 36 hours. The Supreme Court narrowly declined to block it 5-4, despite Justice Samuel Alito’s fierce dissent against this judicial overreach.
“Since the Founding, Congress and the President have occasionally clashed over the use of appropriated funds,” the Trump administration’s application continues. “Congress, with the power of the purse, appropriates money for specific programs; the President, vested with exclusive authority to enforce the laws, has often disagreed about whether and how much of those funds should be spent.”
Judge Ali, clinging to his power grab, refused on Monday to pause his own injunction, pompously declaring: “It is not this Court’s role to second-guess the court of appeals, whether it sits as a panel or as a full court.” He even quoted the Circuit’s recent guidance: “The Court’s latest guidance from the Circuit comes from the latter, which directed five days ago that because the mandate has not yet issued, ‘the preliminary injunction that requires the government to obligate the appropriated funds remains in effect.’”
If the Supreme Court doesn’t act by September 2, the administration warns of massive fallout. They’ll be forced to “take extensive preliminary steps that themselves inflict irreparable harm on the United States—for instance, negotiating with foreign countries about the scope and conditions of potential assistance programs,” Sauer explained.
Worse yet, “Even if the government were to prevail, backtracking on those commitments and proposing rescissions after September 2 would inflict irreparable diplomatic costs and generate needless interbranch friction,” he added, highlighting how these judicial roadblocks erode our nation’s standing and pit branches of government against each other unnecessarily.
This saga exposes a rotten pattern in our judiciary: lower courts, packed with liberal appointees, pounce like vultures on Trump’s America-First policies, issuing lightning-fast injunctions that halt everything in its tracks. Take the asylum ban at the U.S.-Mexico border—district judges blocked it almost immediately after implementation, forcing chaos at our borders while appeals dragged on.
In contrast, the Supreme Court has shown more restraint and often sides with the administration, but it moves at a glacial pace compared to these activist trial courts. For instance, when judges tried to nationwide-block Trump’s order ending birthright citizenship loopholes, the high court stepped in this June to curb such sweeping injunctions, calling it a victory against judicial tyranny.
Yet even after that ruling, sneaky lower-court judges have found workarounds, issuing targeted blocks on policies like tariffs on unfair trade partners or cuts to bloated DEI programs in federal agencies, stalling Trump’s economic revival plans within days of announcement.
The Supreme Court, while frequently granting emergency stays to the Trump team—like allowing the firing of obstructive commissioners or slashing NIH grants tied to woke initiatives—can’t always keep up with the flood of lawsuits from deep-state allies. This delay lets the damage fester, as seen with deportations under the Alien Enemies Act, where district courts in Massachusetts and elsewhere slapped temporary bans, only for appeals courts to dither before SCOTUS could intervene.
