www.vox.com

"So this is a defeat for Trump, but it is an extremely small one. The Supreme Court's order is only one paragraph long, and it mostly says that the Court will not second-guess the lower court because of an amateurish mistake by acting solicitor general Sarah Harris and the other Justice Department lawyers working on this case."

'

"The Trump administration claims to have the power to "impound" federal funding, meaning that the president can cancel spending appropriated by an act of Congress.

But the president does not have this authority under the Constitution. As future Chief Justice William Rehnquist wrote in a 1969 Justice Department memo, "it is in our view extremely difficult to formulate a constitutional theory to justify a refusal by the President to comply with a congressional directive to spend."

This obscure budget procedure could be Trump's biggest weapon
Rehnquist's view was echoed by Kavanuagh in a 2013 opinion he wrote as a lower court judge, which said that "even the President does not have unilateral authority to refuse to spend" funds appropriated by Congress.

So, if the Supreme Court ultimately rules that the Constitution still applies to Donald Trump " an uncertain prospect after the Court's decision last July holding that he is allowed to use the powers of the presidency to commit crimes " it will someday need to rule that Trump cannot impound federal spending."

So there's that.