USAID Frauds: Helping NGOs or Stealing Tax Dollars?
Oct. 12, 2025 • Krish Singh
The political spectrum of the United States has been in chaos recently, and rightly so. With the left-leaning individuals vandalizing Tesla factories and the Republican Administration getting almost a villainous reputation among the leftists, presumably. But does it deserve all that? Probably not. However, the state that the Democratic Administration has left behind has been a big mess to clean up. Nevertheless, Trump has surely been on a roll, but there are some hurdles along the way, and one of them recently caught the flames of the media, although, of course, not of the left-leaning ones. So with the establishment of the Department of Government Efficiency(DOGE), the Republicans have been insanely successful in uncovering the ongoing corruption in the system, while doing it all in public. One of them was the $2 billion payment of taxpayers’ money to a group of American Businesses and NGOs, very well enacted by a District Judge, which can be said to be a very accurate example of abuse of Judicial power.
In essence, what happened: The Trump administration with the establishment of the Department of Government Agency (DOGE) led by Elon Musk intended to dismantle the United States Agency for International Development(USAID) with the argument that it’s a waste of taxpayers’ money and that it doesn’t directly benefit American interests. Often stating that the US was spending billions of dollars on foreign assistance annually. In pursuit of this, the DOGE halted a large part of the funds being disbursed to multiple entities from the USAID, with Trump’s executive order that was passed on January 20, 2025, imposing a 90-day freeze on all foreign aid, which raised many outrages from the public. And one of the halts was on nearly $2 billion worth of taxpayers' money meant to be paid to a group of nonprofits, businesses, and other entities providing foreign aid services for services already rendered. It was halted on the grounds of the executive order, pausing all the foreign aid payments, aiming to review the actions, with the real motive of dismantling the USAID. But on a twist, the nonprofits and businesses receiving the funds that were entitled to them by the state filed a suit that the current administration’s temporary pause of foreign-assistance payments is unlawful. On February 13, 2025, the District Court for the District of Columbia issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) requiring the government to halt its funding pause. Not only that, but after issuing the TRO, the judge furthermore got frustrated by the pace the funds were being disbursed and passed another order on February 25 requiring the government to pay out approximately $2 billion within 36 hours while dismissing the Government’s argument of Sovereign Immunity and in that order, he even went and prevented any other higher court from reviewing and possibly stopping the payments. TROs are naturally non-appealable, but the judge set the second order as enforcing the February 13 TRO, and not as a new injunction. The government retaliated and attempted to seek a stay of that order on grounds of violation of Sovereign Immunity and the presumption that the money would be irrecoverable once paid, but this was ignored. Due to the fast-approaching deadline, the government appealed to the Supreme Court, and the Chief Justice issued an administrative stay on the order. Subsequently, the Chief Justice denied the application to vacate the February 25th order and also upheld the administrative stay. But some justices dissented, arguing that the District court likely lacked jurisdiction, and its order compelling the government to pay $2 billion was an abuse of power. They further dissented based on factors of Sovereign Immunity, that it limited the District Court’s jurisdiction to pass such an order, and that the government could likely suffer irreparable harm as the funds could probably not be recovered.
Regardless of the strong dissents, the Supreme Court allowed the District Court’s order holding the government to pay nearly $2 billion despite strong arguments concerning the District Court’s jurisdiction, nature of the decision, and sovereign immunity.
The question here is, does a District Court Judge who likely lacks jurisdiction hold enough power to pass such an order that forces the government to disburse the halted payment, that were halted on grounds of review, without actually being reviewed? Furthermore, even if it does have the power, why is it so important for it to be so insanely urgent and even non-reviewable by higher courts? That raises serious questions about the act of the judge. The government had to pay nearly $2 billion of taxpayers’ money immediately, not because the law enforces it, but simply because a District Judge ordered so. And as the judicial head, the Supreme Court of the United States is responsible for making sure that the power granted to the judges is not abused. In this case, it probably was abused, and the Supreme Court wasn’t able to fulfill its duty. And this is not just a petty malice, it’s a matter of national concern, which is probably only the tip of the iceberg discovered by the Trump administration. $2 billion tax dollars being given posthaste due to a District Judge’s order, who made it obligatory for the government to do so, and then the higher courts too sided with the decision. It is not about whether it was unlawful, but more about why or how it was such an important emergency that it had the Judiciary siding all along and the Executive’s appeals being ignored by the courts. The D.C. Circuit, for once, can be ignored, for it has had a very left-leaning ideology for a long time, but even the Supreme Court and the Chief Justice being involved in it raises concerning views. The government was simply barred from any investigation into it whatsoever, along with incredibly little time to even seek any recourse.
The result was in favour of the District Court’s order, obliging the government to pay the $2 billion to the parties involved, and that’s enough of a response to how extreme the decision was.
A federal court has many tools to address a party’s supposed nonfeasance. Self-aggrandizement of its jurisdiction is not one of them.
- Samuel Alito, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States