Chief Justice John Roberts killed another injunction that would have paused some of President Donald Trump's decisions from taking effect before they made their way through the courts. Legal analysts say that in the most recent case, it's an example of the Supreme Court killing Congress's constitutional power.

The stay in the case, State Department v. AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition, was decided along partisan lines, with the six justices nominated by Republican presidents. Nearly $5 billion in foreign aid was already passed by in its 2025 budget during the 2024 Congress.

The Washington, D.C. court ordered Trump to allocate the funds granted by Congress before Sept. 30. Trump's administration tried to claw back the nearly $5 billion using the Impoundment Control Act, which was blocked by both the district court and the appeals court. So, Trump's administration begged the Supreme Court to pause the order from going into effect.

While the case works its way through the courts, the administration can proceed with all the cuts. It's consistent with other recent cases in which the Court decided that, whether or not it's legal, what Trump wants can move forward until the highest court rules on the final case.

Supreme Court reporter Kelsey Reichmann cited a concerning detail that revealed Chief Justice John Roberts iced out some of his liberal colleagues.

This was another instance of the infamous "Shadow Docket." Justice Elena Kagan's dissent makes it clear that "less than three weeks" and "with scant briefing, no oral argument and no opportunity to deliberate in conference."

Kagan said that Trump's actions were "essentially, a presidential usurpation of Congress's power of the purse," noted Reichmann.

"There is so little transparency on how shadow docket decisions are made that I'm tempted to read into Kagan's note that the justices didn't get to deliberate in conference. Do they get to for some applications? Maybe, maybe not," she wrote on Bluesky.

"Balls and Strikes" writer and legal analyst Madiba Dennie pointed to the note as well.

"The note about 'no opportunity to deliberate in conference' is def interesting if I'm on the Court and my terrible colleagues zoom forward with this terrible decision without so much as a conversation in conference, I'm holding a press conference instead. blowin up their spot."

"It's a really impressive magic trick. In one paragraph, John Roberts made Congress disappear," remarked Maryland lawyer Joe Dudek.

"So many of us came so very unwillingly to this place of viewing the Supreme Court as unworthy of being viewed as a judicial body. Unworthy of veneration, unworthy of respect. So profoundly reluctantly. But, good lord, have they earned it," lamented appellate lawyer Matthew Stiegler.

Lawyer, journalist and cohost of the "Boom! Lawyered" podcast, Imani Gandy, called the ruling "f---ing ridiculous." She added, "Defund the Supreme Court."

Read the full ruling here.