Department of State v. AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition, No. 24A831. March 5, 2025. The Supreme Court denied the government’s application to vacate Ali’s February 25 payment order. The Chief Justice’s administrative stay was vacated. The unsigned order recites the February 13 TRO and says the present application “does not challenge the Government’s obligation to follow that order.”
The Court then directed: “the District Court should clarify what obligations the Government must fulfill to ensure compliance with the temporary restraining order, with due regard for the feasibility of any compliance timelines.” That is an instruction to clarify. It is not a finding that every claimed invoice is due on a date certain.
Justice Alito dissented, joined by Justices Thomas, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh. Opening line, verified: “Does a single district-court judge who likely lacks jurisdiction have the unchecked power to compel the Government of the United States to pay out (and probably lose forever) 2 billion taxpayer dollars? The answer to that question should be an emphatic ‘No,’ but a majority of this Court apparently thinks otherwise. I am stunned.” A dissent is a dissent. It is not the order of the Court.
Later district-court and Supreme Court proceedings on a September preliminary injunction are a different chapter. They are not this order.