Federal Funding Revoked via Pocket Rescission
The White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) canceled $810 million in congressional appropriations using a “pocket rescission” maneuver. The decision, announced by OMB Director Russ Vought, removes funding previously approved by lawmakers for several federal programs.
The revoked funds were allocated to refugee assistance programs within the Department of Health and Human Services. Additional money designated for a Treasury Department initiative providing debt forgiveness to foreign nations investing in coral reefs and tropical forests was also canceled. A grant program at the Minority Business Development Agency received part of the eliminated funding.
This action marks the latest use of pocket rescissions by the Trump administration. The White House sent its first such request in August 2025, clawing back $4.9 billion intended for international peacekeeping, democracy programs, and development assistance. In June 2025, the administration submitted a regular rescission request to revoke $9.4 billion for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and foreign aid programs.
Congressional Leaders Challenge Executive Authority
Senate Appropriations Chairwoman Susan Collins released a statement Friday evening sharply disagreeing with the tactic. Collins argued that the OMB intentionally withheld funds for months to execute an unlawful cancellation of appropriations approved on a bipartisan basis and signed into law.
“This move shows that OMB intentionally withheld these funds for months to execute this unlawful cancellation of appropriations that were approved on a bipartisan basis and signed into law,” Collins said.
Collins described the delay as an unreported impoundment and a usurpation of Congress’s constitutional power of the purse. She stated she plans to work with other lawmakers to address what she termed illegal actions by the executive branch.
Sen. Patty Murray also criticized the move, stating that pocket rescissions represent theft from the American people. Murray argued that the funds should be helping people rather than being cut off by a president more focused on building a ballroom than investing in families.
Legal Dispute Over Impoundment Control Act
The controversy centers on the interpretation of the 1974 Impoundment Control Act. The law allows the administration to legally freeze funding for 45 days while lawmakers decide whether to approve the rescission. If Congress takes no action during that 45-day period, the administration is required to spend the money.
The Trump administration contends that sending rescission requests within the 45 days preceding the September 30 fiscal year end allows it to revoke funding without a congressional vote. By timing the requests to expire after the fiscal year closes, the White House argues the funds are automatically canceled.
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) disagrees with this interpretation. GAO spokesperson Sarah Kaczmarek stated that the agency stands behind its legal position that pocket rescissions are illegal. The GAO maintains that such actions are not authorized by the Impoundment Control Act.
Previous Rescission Outcomes
Congress has previously intervened in similar funding disputes. After the June 2025 request to revoke $9.4 billion, both chambers signed off on canceling $9 billion. The Senate voted to preserve hundreds of millions of dollars for PEPFAR, a program supporting global health initiatives.
Lawmakers expect a dozen full-year government funding bills later this year.