Department of State v. AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition

Department of State v. AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition
CourtDistrict Court for the District of Columbia
Full case name AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition and Journalism Development Network, Inc. v. United States Department of State, United States Agency for International Development, Marco Rubio, Secretary of State and Acting administrator of United States Agency for International Development, Office of Management and Budget, Russell Vought, Director of Management and Budget, and Donald Trump, President of the United States of America

Global Health Council, Small Business Association for International Companies, HIAS, Management Sciences for Health, Chemonics International Inc., DAI Global, LLC, Democracy International, Inc., and American Bar Association v. Trump, Rubio, Marocco, Vought, Department of State, USAID, and Office of Management and Budget
StartedFebruary 10, 2025
Docket nos.1:25-cv-00400 and 1:25-cv-00402 (D.D.C.)
Terminated February 2025: 25-5046 and 25-5047
Terminated August 2025: 25-5098 and 25-5097
Filed September 2025: 25-5317 and 25-5319 (D.C. Cir.)
24A831 25A269 (Supreme Court)
Case history
Appealed toDC Circuit
Subsequent actiondistrict ruling stayed by Supreme Court via shadow docket
Court membership
Judge sittingAmir H. Ali
Keywords

Department of State v. AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition[a] is a United States court case filed in 2025 against the second Trump administration by several non-profit organizations who were supposed to receive billions in funds from the US government.

Background

See also: USAID in the second Trump administration § Initial 90-day freeze

Consistent with Executive Order 14169, Secretary of State Marco Rubio "paused all U.S. foreign assistance funded by or through the State Department and" USAID.[1]

In August 2025, Trump disclosed to the Congress that the administration would rescind nearly $5 billion in foreign assistance appropriations. The funds would have expired in less than 45 days after the disclosure. If the state department withheld the funds for the 45 days under the Impoundment Control Act, the administration would prevent the funds from being disbursed (a "pocket rescission").[2] A page posted to the Government Accountability Office's website in August 2025 says "A pocket rescission is illegal".[3]

Proceedings

In February 2025, Public Citizen filed suit representing AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition and Journalism Development Network. A parallel case was filed by Global Health Council and other organizations the same month. Both cases were assigned to Judge Amir Ali.[4][5]

On 13 February 2025, Ali granted a request for a temporary restraining order against the freeze.[6][7] On 25 February 2025, Ali ordered the administration to comply with the 13 February 2025 order by 11:59 p.m. on February 26.[8][9][10] The administration appealed to the DC Circuit who, on 26 February 2025, dismissed the administration's appeal. On 26 February 2025, hours before the deadline, John Roberts stayed Ali's ruling.[11][12][13] On 5 March 2025, in an unsigned order, the Supreme Court denied the administration's application for stay of the 25 February 2025 order. The Justices Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Thomas dissented.[14][15][16]

On 6 March 2025, Ali ordered payments be made by March 10.[17] On 10 March 2025, Ali ordered the administration to not withhold compensation for work completed prior to 13 February 2025.[18][17]

On 13 August 2025, the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit said:[19][20]

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. Nor do the grantees have a cause of action under the APA because APA review is precluded by the Impoundment Control Act (ICA). And the grantees may not reframe this fundamentally statutory dispute as an ultra vires claim either. Instead, the Comptroller General may bring suit as authorized by the ICA. Accordingly, we vacate the part of the district court’s preliminary injunction involving impoundment.

— Karen L. Henderson joined by Gregory G. Katsas

The Judge Florence Y. Pan dissented from the circuit's 13 August 2025 ruling.[21] On 20 August 2025, the circuit said "the preliminary injunction that requires the government to obligate the appropriated funds remains in effect".[17][22] On 28 August 2025, the circuit issued an amended decision allowing the case to proceed.[23][24]

On 3 September 2025, Ali blocked the pocket rescission.[25][26][27] The DC circuit declined to block the order.[28][29]

On 9 September 2025, John Roberts partially stayed the 3 September 2025 order "for funds that are subject to the President’s August 28, 2025 recission proposal".[30] On 26 September 2025, the court granted an application for stay by the administration:[31][32][33] The Justices Jackson, Kagan and Sotomayor dissented.

The application for stay presented to The Chief Justice and by him referred to the Court is granted. The Government, at this early stage, has made a sufficient showing that the Impoundment Control Act precludes respondents’ suit, brought pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act, to enforce the appropriations at issue here. The Government has also made a sufficient showing that mandamus relief is unavailable to respondents. And, on the record before the Court, the asserted harms to the Executive’s conduct of foreign affairs appear to outweigh the potential harm faced by respondents. This order should not be read as a final determination on the merits. The relief granted by the Court today reflects our preliminary view, consistent with the standards for interim relief.

The District Court’s September 3, 2025 order granting a preliminary injunction in case Nos. 1:25–cv–400 and 1:25–cv–402 is stayed as to the funding subject to the President’s August 28 special message, pending the disposition of the Government’s appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and disposition of a petition for a writ of certiorari, if such writ is timely sought. Should the petition for a writ of certiorari be denied, this stay shall terminate automatically. In the event certiorari is granted, the stay shall terminate upon the sending down of the judgment of this Court.[29]

— Unsigned (September 26, 2025)

See also

Notes

  1. ^ In the district court and court of appeals, the order of the parties is the reverse: AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition v. Department of State, with the lead plaintiff listed first. In the Supreme Court, the petitioner or party seeking relief from the Supreme Court is listed first, so the Department of State is listed first as the applicant for a stay.

References

  1. ^ "Implementing the President's Executive Order on Reevaluating and Realigning United States Foreign Aid". state.gov (Press release). January 26, 2025.
  2. ^ Congressional Research Service (September 25, 2025). "Pocket Rescissions and the Impoundment Control Act: Background and History". congress.gov.
  3. ^ "What is a "Pocket Rescission" and is It Legal?". GAO. August 6, 2025.
  4. ^ "AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition v. U.S. Department of State". Public Citizen. Representing AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition (AVAC) and Journalism Development Network (JDN), we filed suit
  5. ^ "One year ago, we sued the US Government..." avac.org. February 10, 2026. AVAC and the Journalism Development Network worked with the Public Citizen Litigation Group to sue the US President, the State Department, the US Agency for International Development (USAID), and others, seeking emergency relief from a sweeping freeze on foreign assistance issued by the incoming administration that abruptly halted life-saving global health and development programs. A parallel case was brought by Global Health Council and partners and assigned to the same District Court judge, underscoring the broad concern across the global health community.
  6. ^ Quinn, Melissa (February 13, 2025). "Judge orders Trump administration to temporarily restore funding for foreign assistance programs". CBS News.
  7. ^ Crowley, Michael (February 14, 2025). "Judge Orders Trump Administration to Resume Foreign Aid Spending". The New York Times.
  8. ^ Quinn, Melissa; Rosen, Jacob (February 25, 2025). "Judge orders Trump administration to pay bills from foreign aid contractors, comply with earlier ruling". CBS News.
  9. ^ Montague, Zach (February 25, 2025). "Judge Gives Trump Administration Deadline to Release Foreign Aid". The New York Times.
  10. ^ Pierson, Brendan (February 25, 2025). "Judge gives Trump administration Wednesday night deadline to pay foreign aid funds". Reuters.
  11. ^ Grumbach, Gary; Hurley, Lawrence; Lebowitz, Megan; Gregorian, Dareh; Richards, Zoë (February 26, 2025). "Supreme Court temporarily pauses judge's order on releasing frozen foreign aid funding". NBC News.
  12. ^ Montague, Zach; Crowley, Michael; Liptak, Adam (February 27, 2025). "Chief Justice Allows U.S. to Continue Freeze on Foreign Aid Payments". The New York Times.
  13. ^ "Order" (PDF). supremecourt.gov. February 26, 2025.
  14. ^ Kruzel, John (March 5, 2025). "US Supreme Court won't let Trump withhold payment to foreign aid groups". Reuters.
  15. ^ Liptak, Adam (March 5, 2025). "Supreme Court Rejects Trump's Bid to Freeze Foreign Aid". The New York Times.
  16. ^ "ON APPLICATION TO VACATE THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA" (PDF). supremecourt.gov. March 5, 2025.
  17. ^ a b c "AVAC v. United States Department of State". AVAC.org.
  18. ^ "Memorandum & Opinion – #60 in AIDS VACCINE ADVOCACY COALITION v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE (D.D.C., 1:25-cv-00400)". CourtListener. March 10, 2025. it is hereby ORDERED: Defendants (...) and their agents are enjoined from enforcing (...) the January 24 State Department memorandum, and any other directives that implement sections 3(a) and 3(c) of Executive Order No. 14169, by giving effect to any terminations, suspensions, or stop-work orders issued between January 20, 2025, and February 13, 2025, for any grants, cooperative agreements, or contracts for foreign assistance. Accordingly, the Restrained Defendants shall not withhold payments or letter of credit drawdowns for work completed prior to February 13, 2025.
  19. ^ "August 13, 2025" (PDF). uscourts.gov.
  20. ^ Montague, Zach (August 13, 2025). "Trump Administration Can Withhold Billions in Aid, Appeals Court Rules". The New York Times.
  21. ^ KUNZELMAN, MICHAEL (August 13, 2025). "An appeals court lets the Trump administration suspend or end billions in foreign aid". AP News.
  22. ^ "Per Curiam Order Filed (En Banc Panel) – #01208767984 in Global Health Council v. Donald J. Trump (D.C. Cir., 25-5097)". CourtListener. August 20, 2025.
  23. ^ Fritze, John (August 29, 2025). "Appeals court keeps alive challenge to Trump's effort to cancel billions in foreign aid | CNN Politics". CNN.
  24. ^ "Case: AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition v. United States Department of State". Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse. Amended Judgment (Aug 28) On August 28, the Court of Appeals issued an amended judgment, modifying its August 13 decision and ordering the clerk to issue the mandate. 2025 WL 2480618. The modified decision reiterated that the Plaintiffs could not bring a freestanding constitutional claim if the underlying allegation and claimed authority were statutory, but that, here, the Plaintiffs did not have a cause of action to enforce the Impoundment Control Act through the APA because the ICA precludes such review. However, the Court of Appeals clarified that the Plaintiffs can pursue APA challenges to enforce the Appropriation Act. That same day, the Court of Appeals denied Plaintiffs' petition for rehearing en banc and dismissed as moot the Defendants' petition for an emergency stay. On August 29, Defendants withdrew their application for a stay in the U.S. Supreme Court in light of the appellate court's August 28 decisions.
  25. ^ Raymond, Nate (September 4, 2025). "US judge blocks Trump from unilaterally cutting foreign aid funding". Reuters.
  26. ^ THANAWALA, SUDHIN (September 4, 2025). "Judge orders Trump administration to release billions in foreign aid approved by Congress". AP News.
  27. ^ Cameron, Chris (September 4, 2025). "Federal Judge Blocks Trump's Move to Cut $4.9 Billion in Foreign Aid". The New York Times.
  28. ^ Knauth, Dietrich; Wiessner, Daniel (September 5, 2025). "US appeals court says Trump cannot continue foreign aid cuts". Reuters.
  29. ^ a b "On Application For Stay" (PDF). supremecourt.gov. September 26, 2025. Archived from the original (PDF) on November 4, 2025.
  30. ^ "Order" (PDF). supremecourt.gov. September 9, 2025.
  31. ^ Quinn, Melissa (September 26, 2025). "Supreme Court lets Trump withhold $4 billion in foreign aid approved by Congress - CBS News". CBS News.
  32. ^ Kim, Juliana (September 26, 2025). "Supreme Court allows Trump to withhold $4 billion in foreign aid". NPR.
  33. ^ Marimow, Ann E. (September 26, 2025). "Supreme Court Allows Trump to Slash Foreign Aid". The New York Times.


This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is available under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 unless otherwise noted. Additional terms may apply for the media files.