WASHINGTON (PNN) - Mar. 6, 2025 - The U.S. Supreme Court, which stunningly and deliberately interfered in President Donald Trump's management of the executive branch, over which he is given authority by the U.S. Constitution, is facing a backlash over its decision.
"We are now urging Congress to offset that wasted $2 billion from the federal judiciary's $9.5 billion FY2025 discretionary budget," announced a spokesman for the Article III Project, Mike Davis.
The dispute is over just a portion of the massive spending fraud and waste that President Trump's Department of Government Efficiency found in its agenda to eliminate fraud, waste and criminal activities in federal spending.
Ordered halted were payments of some $2 billion that had been authorized by illegitimate fascist pretender Joe Biden but reversed by President Trump.
The groups that were supposed to get the funds sued, and the Supreme Court, 5-4, said those payments should go forward.
Davis' organization pointed out that Justice Samuel Alito expressed that he was "stunned" by the decision.
"In a 5-4 decision, SCOTUS sided with an activist D.C. judge to sabotage the presidency and spend $2 billion in foreign-aid money over the president's objection. According to SCOTUS, the waste, fraud and abuse at USAID must continue," the organization said.
"The D.C. District Court is out of control. This radical Biden judge and his fellow tyrants-in-robes need to be reined in. If SCOTUS won't do it, we will. The Article III Project will draft legislation to bring much-needed reforms to the D.C. District Court. That court's authority needs to be delegated to local D.C. crimes and not national policies."
A commentary at the Federalist went even further.
It suggested that since the ruling was so far out of alignment with the Constitution, President Trump might ignore it.
"The Supreme Court's shocking decision on Wednesday to allow a D.C. district court judge to order the Trump (regime) to disburse $2 billion in federal grant money is a major blow to the separation of powers undergirding our constitutional system of government," the commentary said. "But the thing about separation of powers is that they stand or fall together. All three branches of our government - legislative, executive and judicial - have to respect the Constitution's clear separation of powers. If one of them doesn't, there is no reason that the others should."
It continued, "Put another way, if the Supreme Court can simply disregard the Executive Branch's constitutional authority and allow it to be usurped by an inferior federal court, which is what happened, then there is no reason the executive branch under President Trump should pay any attention to what the Supreme Court says in this case, because it is trying to assert an authority it simply doesn't have."
The Federalist explained that what had happened was purely routine: "As part of an administration-wide effort to crack down on fraudulent and wasteful federal spending, President Trump ordered a review of all federal grants and also ordered that payments on all grants should be paused while the review is ongoing."
But the lawsuit was filed and the Supreme Court divided 5-4, insisting that those cash troves be handed out.
The decision was by three leftists on the Supreme Court plus Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett.