Photo of Anuj VohraPhoto of T. Michael GuiffrePhoto of Alexandra Barbee-Garrett

On February 13, 2025, Judge Amir Ali of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia issued a temporary restraining order in two combined cases—one filed by U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) contractors, a second by USAID grant recipients—challenging Executive Order 14169, “Reevaluating and Realigning United States Foreign Aid,” which paused almost all foreign assistance funding

In issuing the TRO, the Court found the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on the merits because “Defendants ha[d] not offered any explanation for why a blanket suspension of all congressionally appropriated foreign aid, which set off a shockwave and upended reliance interests for thousands of agreements with businesses, nonprofits, and organizations around the country, was a rational precursor to reviewing programs.” The Court highlighted the harm to plaintiffs’ core business operations resulting from the funding pause, coupled with the harm to the beneficiaries of the myriad life-sustaining programs administered by USAID implementing partners. The Court also rejected the government’s contention that a complete freeze on foreign assistance was necessary to assess whether USAID’s programming aligned with the Trump Administration’s foreign policy goals and found the balance of harms and public interest both weighed in favor of a TRO. 

The Court’s TRO provides immediate relief for contractors—it prevents the State Department, USAID, the Office of Management and Budget, or their actors, from suspending, pausing, or preventing the disbursement of funds “in connection with any contracts, grants, cooperative agreements, loans, or other federal foreign assistance award that was in existence of as of January 19, 2025,” or from giving effect to any terminations, suspensions, or stop-work orders on those programs. At the same time, the Court’s Order makes clear that it does not “prohibit the Restrained Defendants from enforcing the terms of contracts or grants.” 

With that in mind, USAID implementing partners should take the opportunity afforded by the TRO to seek payment of monies owed for work performed on their contracts and grants, while also preparing for future terminations that may result from the individualized administration of contracts or grants should the Court not issue broader and more permanent injunctive relief. And while the TRO provides an opportunity, implementing partners should be prepared to proceed with patience in the processing of any such claims, given the substantial layoffs of USAID staff that have already occurred.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Anuj Vohra Anuj Vohra

Anuj Vohra litigates high-stakes disputes on behalf of government contractors in federal and state court, and maintains an active bid protest practice before the U.S. Government Accountability Office and the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. He also assists clients with an array of…

Anuj Vohra litigates high-stakes disputes on behalf of government contractors in federal and state court, and maintains an active bid protest practice before the U.S. Government Accountability Office and the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. He also assists clients with an array of issues related to contract formation (including subcontracts and teaming agreements), regulatory compliance, internal and government-facing investigations, suspension and debarment, organizational conflicts of interest (“OCIs”), intellectual property and data rights, and the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”).

Prior to entering private practice, Anuj spent six years as a Trial Attorney in the U.S. Department of Justice’s Commercial Litigation Branch. At DOJ, he was a member of the Bid Protest Team—which handles the department’s largest and most complex protests—and served as lead counsel in dozens of matters representing the United States in commercial disputes before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the Court of Federal Claims, and the U.S. Court of International Trade.

Photo of T. Michael Guiffre T. Michael Guiffre

T. Michael Guiffre is a skilled trial lawyer and litigator with more than 25 years of global disputes experience. Michael has served as lead counsel in international and domestic arbitrations and federal and state court litigation throughout the United States. He is a

T. Michael Guiffre is a skilled trial lawyer and litigator with more than 25 years of global disputes experience. Michael has served as lead counsel in international and domestic arbitrations and federal and state court litigation throughout the United States. He is a partner in the International Dispute Resolution Group.

Michael represents clients in a wide variety of disputes involving commercial and government contracts, construction claims, aeropolitical and aviation issues, investor-state treaties, intellectual property rights, business torts, and fraud. He is also adept in litigating contract disputes, bid protests, and other claims against the U.S. government and has defended companies against procurement fraud allegations (including qui tam actions) and terminations for default. Michael has managed a variety of government and internal corporate investigations.

Michael served for six years as an officer and lawyer in the U.S. Army, where he obtained substantial trial and appellate experience. He managed complex contract litigation and fraud investigations in the Office of the Chief Trial Attorney, was lead counsel in dozens of appeals, and prosecuted numerous criminal offenses.

Photo of Alexandra Barbee-Garrett Alexandra Barbee-Garrett

Alexandra Barbee-Garrett is an associate in Crowell & Moring’s Washington, D.C. office, where she practices in the Government Contracts Group.

Alex represents government contractors in both litigation and counseling matters. Her practice includes bid protests before the Government Accountability Office (GAO), the U.S.

Alexandra Barbee-Garrett is an associate in Crowell & Moring’s Washington, D.C. office, where she practices in the Government Contracts Group.

Alex represents government contractors in both litigation and counseling matters. Her practice includes bid protests before the Government Accountability Office (GAO), the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Alex’s practice also focuses on federal regulatory compliance, mandatory disclosures to the government, contract disputes under the Contract Disputes Act (CDA), prime-sub disputes, and False Claims Act and internal investigations.

Prior to joining Crowell & Moring, Alex was a law clerk to Judge Richard A. Hertling of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims and a government contracts associate at another large law firm. Alex graduated honors from The George Washington University Law School, where she was an articles editor of The Public Contract Law Journal. Alex won the 2015 Government Contracts Moot Court Competition and served as chair for the 2016 competition. Prior to law school, Alex worked as a health care legislative assistant for Rep. Rick Larsen (WA) in the U.S. House of Representatives. She received her B.A. in international studies and anthropology from the University of Washington.