US Supreme Court sides with Trump in USAID case

American writer and editor Rod D. Martin posted a thread on the social media platform X, explaining why U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts sided with President Donald Trump in his legal battle against Federal Judge Amir Ali.

As reported by Caliber.Az, the post highlights: “BREAKING: Chief Justice Roberts just SHUT DOWN a Democrat federal judge trying to force the Trump admin to release BILLIONS in foreign aid shut down at USAID. 

This is HUGE, for several reasons...

Let me break down what just happened and why this matters. A Dem district judge tried playing financial dictator with YOUR tax dollars, with another BOGUS ‘nationwide injunction’.

I wrote about nationwide injunction abuse in this article:

As a friend of mine in the U.S. Senate says, Chief Justice John Roberts ‘loathes Donald Trump’. 

But this was a bridge too far even for Roberts.

Federal Judge Amir Ali ordered Trump to shell out $2 BILLION in ‘foreign aid’ grift by midnight last night.

Yes, you read that right. $2,000,000,000, and with basically NO NOTICE. 

But here's where it gets WILD. The Trump team went to appeals court first (like they're supposed to). What happened? CRICKETS. The DC Circuit just sat on it.

So Team Trump goes straight to SCOTUS. And Roberts BLOCKS THE ORDER. Single-handedly. No debate. BOOM. 

Then the DC Circuit has the AUDACITY to claim Ali's orders ‘couldn't be appealed.’ WHAT?! Since when are federal judges KINGS who can't be questioned? 

Uh, hate to break it to you, but the Supreme Court disagrees.

Here's the REAL story: Roberts is sending a message. He's FED UP with activist judges trying to run the executive branch from their courtrooms. 

And face it: where does one single local district judge get off blocking national policy? It's nuts.

Roberts has warned the lowest Federal courts before. Democrats constantly forum shop to find the friendliest judges to block everything Republicans do, especially Trump. They're abusing the process.

Now Roberts isn't just talking: he's acting.

THINK ABOUT IT: If Roberts thought the judge was right, he could've done nothing. Instead, he stepped in IMMEDIATELY. That's a major signal. 

The Court is going to end injunction abuse. And they shouldn't have to. But local judges shouldn't act like political operatives.

The message is clear: The era of judicial activism and lawfare is getting pushback from the very top. Times are changing”