A federal appellate court just released a ruling stating that President Donald Trump is not allowed to cut billions of dollars in foreign aid. 

This, according to The Hill, has to do with the "pocket rescissions" story that you may have read about in the news recently.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled against the Trump administration by a vote of 2-1.

US appeals court says Trump administration can't unilaterally cut foreign aid. The administration tried to withhold roughly $4 billion of the $11 billion appropriated in 2024 for aid projects.

I thought the President ran foreign policy? When did it become the job of a Federal…

— CombsJC (@RedState66) September 6, 2025

Background

President Trump and his administration are trying to use a "pocket rescission" mechanism in order to reclaim about $5 billion in foreign funding that had previously been allocated by Congress.

The Daily Caller reports:

Trump had attempted to reclaim $4.9 billion allocated to the State Department and USAID through a rarely used “pocket rescission” mechanism. The administration notified Congress of its intentions in late August.

Trump immediately received pushback for the move, even from some congressional Republicans, such as U.S. Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME). She, as the chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, called Trump's move an “attempt to undermine the law.”

Unsurprisingly, the move was immediately challenged in the courts.

U.S. District Judge Amir Ali, ruling against Trump, wrote:

Defendants’ reasons for not developing an argument here over the numerous months and opportunities given may be many, including that, even having changed their position, there is not a plausible interpretation of the statutes that would justify the billions of dollars they plan to withhold. Whatever the reason, Defendants have given no justification to displace the bedrock expectation that Congress’s appropriations must be followed and that absent a ‘claim of unconstitutionality that has not been rejected by final Court order, the Executive must abide by statutory mandates.'

The ruling

Now, an appellate court has upheld the lower court ruling.

The Daily Caller reports, "Justices Cornelia Pillard and Florence Pan, appointed by former Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden, respectively, sided with the lower court. Judge Justin Walker, a Trump appointee, dissented."

The appellate panel, according to the outlet, said, "Appellants have not satisfied the stringent requirements for a stay pending appeal."

The question now is whether the Trump administration is going to further appeal the case.

The answer, at the time of this writing, remains unclear.