A federal judge on Thursday ordered the Trump administration to release some foreign aid payments by Monday evening to U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) contractors and nonprofits who challenged the freeze, a decision he called the “first concrete step” toward compliance with his previous order to resume existing foreign aid contracts.
U.S. District Judge Amir Ali, an appointee of former President Biden, said the government must release the payments by 6 p.m. on Monday and that he would weigh a timeline for releasing the rest of the funds while he considers whether to grant injunctive relief to the plaintiffs as litigation is ongoing.
The new schedule comes after the Trump administration for weeks attempted to fend off Ali’s order to resume existing foreign aid contracts. The administration has broadly looked to dismantle USAID, including by firing employees and freezing its payments to contractors.
The administration took the effort all the way to the Supreme Court, which in a 5-4 emergency decision Wednesday declined to lift Ali’s enforcement efforts and sent the case back to set the new timeline for releasing the nearly $2 billion.
“When the Supreme Court speaks, I want to take that action as soon as possible, to give clarity,” Ali said.
About $70 million of the funds owed to the plaintiffs were already released overnight, following the high court’s decision, the judge said.
The USAID contractors who sued the Trump administration alleged they were waiting on hundreds of millions of dollars in outstanding invoices from the government. Two other nonprofits also sued, claiming Trump’s executive order freezing foreign aid violated the separation of powers and caused irreparable harm to their operations that heavily rely on USAID funding.
“The result has been catastrophic, considering billions of dollars in lifesaving humanitarian aid have without warning been shut off literally overnight,” Stephen Wirth, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said Thursday afternoon during a hearing.
They argued that the State Department could not have feasibly conducted a case-by-case review of all contracts, instead suggesting the agency made an unlawful blanket decision to stop all aid.
The Justice Department has said in court filings that an “individualized review process” was completed for grants and federal assistance award obligations, though the review of some contracts was ongoing.
Ali questioned how such a review could occur so quickly, to which the government replied that the plaintiffs’ request for a temporary restraining order resulted in a shift in resources to get the job done more quickly.
The plaintiffs have “a problem that is of their own litigation choices,” said Justice Department lawyer Indraneel Sur.
Earlier Thursday, a different federal judge declined to immediately spare USAID personal services contractors from mass firings, in part because the harm they face is “directly traceable” to changes the government made to their contracts. The judge suggested relief should be sought through different channels.
Lawyers for the coalition of USAID contractors and nonprofits said Thursday afternoon that there are “more varied awards” in their case, contending the argument that contract disputes should be litigated elsewhere is “much stronger” in the other case.
Ali took the motion for a preliminary injunction under advisement but signaled that his decision is not predetermined.
“I don’t hold argument unless I’m actually, genuinely still wrestling with some issues,” the judge said.
Zach Schonfeld contributed.
