Trump Cancels Nearly $1 Billion in Approved Federal Spending

According to two separate reports on the announcement, the White House said Friday that President Trump is pulling back almost $1 billion in funding Congress had already authorized, invoking a rarely used and disputed budgetary tool called a pocket rescission.¹²

What was cut

The Office of Management and Budget characterized the cancellations as going after what it termed the most harmful government spending, arguing the money was unneeded since unauthorized border crossings had dropped sharply.¹²

Affected programs include an Education Department effort aimed at students who are migrants, a Justice Department office dedicated to easing racial tensions, and housing counseling services operated by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. A series of Health and Human Services grants were described by the administration as outright harmful and blatantly ideological.¹²

According to the White House, $70 million earmarked for what it called woke international education programs, $28 million in HHS research grant money, and $9 million in debt relief for countries funding climate policies were all being clawed back. A minority business development program was also targeted, with $10 million withheld, according to one account.¹²

One account indicated the bulk of the cuts fall on Health and Human Services programs that assist refugees and unaccompanied minors alleged to be in the country without legal status, whereas another account described the cuts as more broadly aimed at immigrant services. A White House release noted that some of the affected organizations are led by people who previously worked in Barack Obama's administration.¹²

A contested legal maneuver

Federal statute grants lawmakers a 45-day window to scrutinize proposed spending cuts before they go into effect. Trump announced the cuts with just five days remaining in the federal fiscal year, while the House was out of session through the November election, a timing that made congressional review all but impossible.¹²

The Government Accountability Office has determined that this tactic, referred to as a pocket rescission, violates the law. The Trump administration argues it is a legally permissible tool despite what it acknowledges is some legal murkiness.¹²

One year earlier, Trump employed a pocket rescission—the first such move in nearly half a century—to withhold $4.9 billion in foreign aid that Congress had already approved. The Supreme Court opted not to intervene, citing the president's substantial authority over foreign affairs as a key factor in its reasoning. This year's cuts target domestic spending instead. One source noted that the prior instance of a pocket rescission, effectively the last one before this, dated back to 1977, when Jimmy Carter withdrew his own proposed clawback after having submitted it well before the 45-day review period expired.¹²

Congressional reaction

Sen. Susan Collins, who chairs the Senate Appropriations Committee, condemned the move, saying it came without warning or consultation. She called it "these illegal actions" and said she would work with colleagues to address them. Collins argued that the delay amounted to "a usurpation of Congress's appropriations powers," and noted, "OMB is an agency of the executive branch. It does not get to decide which programs are worth funding." She characterized the step as "the most recent attempt by this Office of Management and Budget to undermine Congress's Constitutional power of the purse."¹²³

Sen. Patty Murray, the top Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Committee, described the action as "theft from the American people, plain and simple." She noted that Democrats had pushed to add language blocking the administration from seizing Congress's spending authority, but Republicans refused to support it. She said: "These are funds Congress has delivered on a bipartisan basis and should be helping people—not cut off by a president more focused on building a ballroom than investing in families," and added that "it's past time Republicans join us in that fight."¹²

Broader pattern

This pocket rescission reflects a wider trend of the Trump administration consolidating authority over the federal government—moves that have included mass firings of federal employees, sweeping tariff hikes, and launching military action in Iran without congressional approval. One source characterized this pattern as diminishing Congress's power, adding that it effectively shifts responsibility onto courts to define the boundaries of presidential authority.¹²