President Donald Trump won a major legal victory Wednesday in his effort to block spending approved by Congress when a three-judge panel threw out lawsuits filed by groups that wanted their funding restored.
By a 2-1 vote, the panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that under the Impoundment Control Act of 1974, cited by groups that wanted their funds, only the Government Accountability Office could sue the President for withholding foreign aid money, according to The New York Times.
Judge Karen Henderson, who was appointed by President George H.W. Bush, as well as Judge Gregory Katsas, who was appointed by Trump, ruled in the president’s favor, according to ABC.
Judge Florence Pan, who was appointed by former President Joe Biden, sided with the agencies against Trump, according to The New York Times.
????BREAKING: Appeals court hands Trump a big win, ruling his administration can slash billions in foreign aid Congress approved, bolstering his push to dismantle USAID and block programs out of favor with his agenda. pic.twitter.com/P2XzE49zzT
— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) August 13, 2025
“The district court erred in granting that relief because the grantees lack a cause of action to press their claims. They may not bring a freestanding constitutional claim if the underlying alleged violation and claimed authority are statutory,” Henderson wrote in the majority opinion.
“The parties also dispute the scope of the district court’s remedy but we need not resolve it… because the grantees have failed to satisfy the requirements for a preliminary injunction in any event,” Henderson added.
Lawsuits challenging the president, she wrote, “cannot be recast as constitutional claims through the mere invocation of the separation of powers.”
As for the claim that agencies would be wiped out without their cash, the opinion said that, “Because the large-scale contract terminations were not enjoined, it stands to reason that existential financial harm would already have taken place by the time that the grantees would finally receive unobligated funds for which they first had to compete. Or, if the later opportunity to compete for additional grants could fix the harm, it would not be irreparable.”
The ruling means that the administration does not need to obey a lower court’s order to process funding for USAID and other agencies from which the administration has sought to withhold funds, according to The New York Times.
Because the ruling found that the agencies suing Trump had no standing, the broader issue of whether Trump has the constitutional power to block spending approved by Congress was not addressed in the ruling.
Pan took the two judges that formed the majority to task.
“The court’s holding that the grantees have no constitutional cause of action is as startling as it is erroneous,” she wrote.
Another @TheJusticeDept victory in court for President Trump’s agenda!
In a 2-1 ruling, the DC Circuit lifted an injunction ordering President Trump to spend hard-earned taxpayer dollars on wasteful foreign aid projects.
We will continue to successfully protect core…
— Attorney General Pamela Bondi (@AGPamBondi) August 13, 2025
“The majority holds that when the president refuses to spend funds appropriated by Congress based on policy disagreements, that is merely a statutory violation and raises no constitutional alarm bells,” she wrote
Some of the suit’s plaintiffs said they would ask for a review by the 15-judge appeals court, according to The Washington Post.
The outlet noted that the funding in question expires Sept. 30, the end of the federal fiscal year.
Advertise with The Western Journal and reach millions of highly engaged readers, while supporting our work. Advertise Today.