Judge Amir Ali / Senate Judiciary Committee hearing screen image
The Supreme Court in a 5-4 ruling denied the Trump Administration’s request to vacate Judge Amir Ali’s TRO forcing the administration to pay $2 billion in foreign contracts.
But the fight isn’t over yet.
Biden-appointed Judge Amir Ali last Tuesday blasted DOJ lawyers over USAID disbursement and ordered the Trump Administration to pay the foreign contracts by 11:59 pm last Wednesday evening.
The Trump Administration last Wednesday evening filed an emergency appeal asking the Supreme Court to intervene after Judge Ali ordered the Admin to pay $2 billion in foreign contracts by midnight last Wednesday.
The Supreme Court initially stopped the Biden’s judge’s midnight deadline, however, on Wednesday, the high court denied the Trump Administration’s request to vacate judge Ali’s order.
Conservative Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh dissented.
Alito said he was stunned by the judge’s order forcing the Trump Administration to pay $2 billion in foreign contracts.
“Does a single district-court judge who likely lacks jurisdiction have the unchecked power to compel the Government of the United States to pay out (and probably lose forever) 2 billion taxpayer dollars? The answer to that question should be an emphatic “No,” but a majority of this Court apparently thinks otherwise. I am stunned,” Alito wrote in a scathing dissent.
Alito blasted Judge Ali for treating a TRO like a preliminary injunction – only TRO’s are generally not appealable.
“To start, it is clear that the District Court’s enforcement order should be construed as an appealable preliminary injunction, not a mere TRO. A TRO, as its name suggests, is “temporary,” and its proper role is to “restrain” challenged conduct for a short time while the court considers whether more lasting relief is warranted,” Alito wrote.
Alito said since the TRO was acting like a mandatory injunction, the Appeals Court “had jurisdiction to consider the Government’s appeal.”
Justice Alito said the Supreme Court can also review and vacate the district court’s judgement.
“For these reasons, the Court of Appeals had jurisdiction to consider the Government’s appeal, and we have jurisdiction to review and summarily vacate that court’s erroneous judgment,” Justice Alito said.
In other words, Alito and the three other conservative justices who dissented, were ready to review the judge’s order.
Ed Whelan, a former clerk to Justice Scalia said the Judge Amir Ali labeled his order to enforce a TRO purposely to take advantage of the fact that TROs generally cannot be appealed.
Very fishy that district judge Amir Ali labeled his order an order to enforce a temporary restraining order. Seems clearly designed to take advantage of fact that TROs are generally not appealable. 4/
— Ed Whelan (@EdWhelanEPPC) March 5, 2025
Ed Whelan continued: “On remand, Judge Ali will need to comply with directive to “clarify what obligations the Government must fulfill to ensure compliance with the temporary restraining order, with due regard for the feasibility of any compliance timelines.”
“DOJ will likely seek a stay of his order,” he added.
I don’t think that this is the end of this matter. On remand, Judge Ali will need to comply with directive to “clarify what obligations the Government must fulfill to ensure compliance with the temporary restraining order, with due regard for the feasibility of any compliance…
— Ed Whelan (@EdWhelanEPPC) March 5, 2025
The fight over the $2 billion in funding for foreign contracts is not over yet.
Judge Ali entered a minute order following the Supreme Court’s denial of the Trump Administration’s application to vacate his order.
A hearing on the preliminary injunction is scheduled for Thursday, March 6.
BREAKING: Judge Ali enters minute order following Supreme Court’s denial of Trump Administration’s Application to stay/vacate. pic.twitter.com/J9HKDoJsK4
— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) March 5, 2025
Constitutional legal scholar Jonathan Turley weighed in after the Supreme Court’s ruling.
“The key here is that this was a controversial move to review a TRO, which is generally not reviewable. What is clear is that there are four justices who were still prepared to do so and would obviously be likely to grant review in the next round,” Jonathan Turley wrote.
“That next round would come after the hearing on the preliminary injunction, which is scheduled for March 6th,” Turley wrote. “It can then be appealed to these awaiting justices. Only four are needed to grant review, so you do the math.”
Read Jonathan Turley’s analysis of the Supreme Court’s decision here:
There is more than meets the eye in this 5-4, unsigned opinion. After the March 6 hearing on the preliminary injunction, the case can be appealed to these awaiting justices. Only four are needed to grant review, so you do the math. https://t.co/jqsC7zkoGb
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) March 5, 2025
The post Biden Judge’s “Fishy” Order That Led to Supreme Court’s Ruling on $2 Billion in Frozen USAID Payments appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.