No. 25A269
Department of State, et al. v. AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition, et al.
Amici (2)
Experienced Counsel
Tags: administrative-procedure-act agency-discretion congressional-appropriations executive-branch funding-restrictions judicial-review
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw JusticiabilityDoctri
AdministrativeLaw JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
N/A
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the Administrative Procedure Act permits judicial review of executive branch funding decisions that potentially conflict with congressional appropriations restrictions
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
No question identified. : Statement.. A. B. Argument.. A. C. Conclusion
Docket Entries
2025-09-26
Application (25A269) referred to the Court.
2025-09-26
On September 3, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia entered a preliminary injunction directing the Executive to obligate roughly $10.5 billion of appropriated aid funding set to expire on September 30. Of that $10.5 billion, $4 billion was proposed to be rescinded in a “special message” transmitted pursuant to the Impoundment Control Act. See 2 U. S. C. §681 <i>et seq</i>. After the District Court and the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit denied stays of that order, the Government filed this application to stay the District Court’s injunction. 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.
Justice Kagan, joined by Justice Sotomayor and Justice Jackson, dissent. (Detached Opinion)
2025-09-26
On September 3, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia entered a preliminary injunction directing the Executive to obligate roughly $10.5 billion of appropriated aid funding set to expire on September 30. Of that $10.5 billion, $4 billion was proposed to be rescinded in a “special message” transmitted pursuant to the Impoundment Control Act. See 2 U. S. C. §681 <i>et seq</i>. After the District Court and the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit denied stays of that order, the Government filed this application to stay the District Court’s injunction. 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.
Justice Kagan, joined by Justice Sotomayor and Justice Jackson, dissent. (Detached <a href = 'https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/25a269_bp7c.pdf'>Opinion</a>)
2025-09-15
Reply of Department of State in support of application submitted.
2025-09-15
Reply of applicant Department of State, et al. filed.
2025-09-12
Amicus brief of Representative Rosa L. DeLauro submitted.
2025-09-12
Response of Global Health Council, et al. to application submitted.
2025-09-12
Response to application from respondent Global Health Council, et al. filed.
2025-09-12
Brief amicus curiae of Representative Rosa L. DeLauro filed.
2025-09-11
Amicus brief of Alan B. Morrison submitted.
2025-09-11
Brief amicus curiae of Alan B. Morrison filed.
2025-09-09
Order entered by The Chief Justice: Upon consideration of the application of counsel for the applicants, it is ordered that the September 3, 2025 order of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, case Nos. 1:25-cv-400 and 1:25-cv-402, is hereby partially stayed for funds that are subject to the President’s August 28, 2025 recission proposal currently pending before Congress pending further order of The Chief Justice or of the Court. It is further ordered that a response to the application be filed on or before Friday, September 12th, 2025, by 4 p.m. (EDT).
2025-09-08
Application (25A269) for a stay, submitted to The Chief Justice.
2025-09-08
Opposition to Request for Immediate Administrative Stay of Global Health Council, et al. submitted.
2025-09-08
Opposition to Request for Immediate Administrative Stay filed.
Attorneys
AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition, Journalism Development Network, Center for Victims of Torture
Lauren Elizabeth Bateman — Public Citizen, Respondent
Lauren Elizabeth Bateman — Public Citizen, Respondent
Allison M. Zieve — Public Citizen Litigation Group, Respondent
Allison M. Zieve — Public Citizen Litigation Group, Respondent
Nicolas Anthony Sansone — Public Citizen Litigation Group, Respondent
Nicolas Anthony Sansone — Public Citizen Litigation Group, Respondent
Alan B. Morrison
Alan B. Morrison — George Washington Law School, Amicus
Alan B. Morrison — George Washington Law School, Amicus
Department of State
D. John Sauer — Solicitor General, Petitioner
D. John Sauer — Solicitor General, Petitioner
Global Health Council, et al.
Daniel Frederick Jacobson — Jacobson Lawyers Group PLLC, Respondent
Daniel Frederick Jacobson — Jacobson Lawyers Group PLLC, Respondent
Stephen Kent Wirth — Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP, Respondent
Stephen Kent Wirth — Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP, Respondent
Representative Rosa L. DeLauro