That's Another Win: 4th Circuit Rules on Trump Admin's Request for Stay in USAID/DOGE Case

For those keeping score at home, the Trump administration secured another legal win on Friday in a case we've covered here at RedState. The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals granted the administration's request to stay the district court's preliminary injunction which effectively blocked DOGE's activities as to USAID. What that means from a practical standpoint is that DOGE may proceed with its work at the agency while the matter is sorted out through the courts.

JUST IN: The 4th circuit court of appeals has cleared the way for Elon Musk and DOGE to continue operating in USAID, staying a lower court’s ruling that barred DOGE’s activities. pic.twitter.com/nOutYGc6Mo
— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) March 28, 2025

If this seems reminiscent of another ruling I wrote about this week, that's because it is. On Tuesday, as I reported, the same court issued an administrative stay of the injunction — but as I noted in that article, that was merely a temporary reprieve. In fact, the order itself stated that it remained in effect only until the close of business on Thursday.

Déjà vu All Over Again: ANOTHER Federal Judge Tries to Thwart Trump Agenda, Goes to Bat for USAID

The injunction in question was a prime example of the ongoing overreach of several district court judges who appear to be under the impression that their primary responsibility is to block the agenda of the duly elected executive (the one named "Trump," that is) regardless of whether that is consistent with the rule of law or not. As Bob Hoge wrote about the injunction at the time it was issued:

The onslaught continued Tuesday as yet another judge decided he was the boss and told Trump that their dismantling of the left-wing agency USAID was likely unconstitutional:
A federal judge in Maryland has ruled that the Trump administration’s efforts to shut down the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) were likely unconstitutional, and has ordered it to ultimately reinstate the agency’s lawful functions.
On Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Theodore Chuang concluded DOGE’s efforts "to shut down USAID on an accelerated basis, including its apparent decision to permanently close USAID headquarters without the approval of a duly appointed USAID officer, likely violated the United States Constitution in multiple ways."

Bob's summary continues:

The judge went a lot further than that though, ordering the administration to undo all the progress that that's been achieved:
In his ruling, Chuang, a 2014 Obama bench appointee, also ordered immediate restoration of email and computer access to all USAID employees, including those placed on administrative leave.
DOGE is now prohibited from any further cuts to USAID.

The lawsuit was filed by current and former agency employees and contractors.

Now, however, the 4th Circuit has ordered a (more or less permanent) stay of that injunction while the matter works its way through the courts on the merits.

The full 44-page order may be viewed here, but following is a key excerpt:

Last, as to the public interest, the public certainly has an interest in ensuring the government is acting constitutionally. However, the public also has an interest in judges wielding power only when so authorized. That authorization limits us to deciding cases and controversies, not political disputes. Cases and controversies involve actual injuries to actual parties, not injuries that are speculative and extend beyond the parties in this case. Courts must be wary of stretching to find harm at the preliminary injunction stage when the record does not support it. This is because the normal practice of “methodically developing arguments and evidence,” is necessarily cast aside for what is often and “almost by design a fast and furious business.” (citations omitted)

One added note: All three of the judges on this panel agreed with the result (the issuance of the stay), but Judge Roger Gregory filed a concurring opinion, in which he expressed serious concern regarding the administration's actions regarding USAID. In the end, however, he agreed with the issuance of the stay despite his misgivings:

We may never know how many lives will be lost or cut short by the Defendants’ decision to abruptly cancel billions of dollars in congressionally appropriated foreign aid. We may never know the lasting effect of Defendants’ actions on our national aspirations and goals. But those are not the questions before the Court today. The question before us is whether Defendants have satisfied their burden for a stay of the district court’s injunction pending their appeal to this Court.

One might read that and rightly infer that Judge Gregory is of the liberal persuasion — and not at all a fan of the Trump administration. Nevertheless, he did not let that override the rule of law here. Several of his lower court brethren might do well to take a cue from that.

RedState will, of course, continue to monitor the case and provide updates as they become available.

Editor's Note: Radical leftist judges are doing everything they can to hamstring President Trump's agenda to make America great again.

Help us hold these corrupt judges accountable for their unconstitutional rulings. Join RedState VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your membership.