This is a procedural appellate ruling on an injunction regarding executive branch resource allocation. Constitutional damage is moderate (A=22.42): separation_of_powers (4) reflects judicial deference to executive budget authority but within normal bounds; rule_of_law (3) captures the reversal of lower court but represents standard appellate process; capture (2) reflects DOGE's unusual extra-governmental status but mechanism is standard budget cuts; civil_rights (1) minimal as foreign aid recipients lack constitutional standing. Severity modifiers slightly elevated for precedent regarding DOGE operations (1.15) but reversibility high (0.95) as Congress controls appropriations. Mechanism modifier 1.15 for resource_reallocation affecting federal operations. B-score high (23.89) driven by DOGE branding (meme_ability:8), media coverage volume, and narrative alignment with downsizing agenda. However, the actual constitutional impact is procedural appellate standard - courts routinely stay injunctions pending appeal, especially on executive budget matters. The 7 nearly identical headlines suggest coordinated messaging. Delta D=-1.47 places this near boundary but substantive analysis reveals this is routine judicial process with outsized attention due to DOGE branding.