Judge Issues Order On Federal Aid Agency Case

By
Rachel Stevenson
-
0
752

What this judge just did could hand power back to a scandal-ridden bureaucracy – and take it from the president.

It started with a Zambian consulting firm losing its U.S. funding—and ended with a Washington, D.C. judge trying to sideline a sitting U.S. president.

A federal judge in the District of Columbia ruled Tuesday that President Trump did not have the authority to appoint an acting leader to the African Development Foundation, an obscure foreign aid agency that’s been mired in scandal for years. And the result? A foreign company that receives 100% of its revenue from U.S. taxpayer dollars is now getting legal protection to keep that cash flowing—while the president’s own appointee is benched.

What makes this ruling so eyebrow-raising isn’t just the international angle. It’s the bigger play: a liberal legal group backed by left-wing power brokers just scored a major win to block the president’s ability to temporarily fill a federal role—during a time when the agency has no Senate-confirmed board in place.

If you’re wondering who’s actually running the agency now… well, buckle up.

After the last president of the African Development Foundation—Travis Adkins, who was accused of racially hostile comments and abusing employees—resigned, a committee of bureaucrats took over. One of those bureaucrats? Mathieu Zahui, who was reportedly caught on tape steering contracts to a friend in exchange for kickbacks. While Zahui hasn’t yet been charged, he remains under investigation by the USAID Inspector General.

And here’s where it gets even murkier…

Trump appointee Pete Marocco, who previously helped dismantle waste and fraud at USAID, stepped in to bring accountability to the agency. He terminated the grant to the Zambian group—which doesn’t even have a single private-sector client—saying it no longer aligned with the Foundation’s goals. But because Marocco was never confirmed by the Senate (as required for permanent leadership), the judge ruled that he couldn’t legally make that call—even temporarily.

Now? That same agency may be turned back over to the very bureaucrats whose actions triggered an inspector general probe, just because the courts don’t want the president making appointments they think belong to Congress.

And it gets worse.

The firm at the center of the case, Rural Development Innovations (RDI), admitted it will be forced to shut down without U.S. funding. Why? Because they can’t afford to lay off workers in Zambia under local law without U.S. dollars covering the severance.

Read that again: An African firm is using American taxpayer money to argue that the U.S. government is legally obligated to keep paying them—so they can fire their own workers. And a U.S. judge just said they might have a point.

One of the plaintiffs even asked the court to enjoin the President himself—but the judge stopped short there. Instead, he slapped an injunction on Marocco and multiple U.S. departments, blocking them from following through with the president’s directive.

What’s next? If this ruling stands, a small, scandal-laden federal agency could end up back under the control of unelected bureaucrats, including at least one figure tied to an alleged kickback scheme—all because a court says the President doesn’t have the power to temporarily clean house.

So if you’re wondering whether elections still matter when it comes to cleaning up Washington… you’re not the only one.

👉 [See what else the Biden-era courts are blocking now]

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR