Recent Developments:
Link to background on the Impoundment Control Act on Appropriations.com
Fri, Jan 31, 2025: US District Court John McConnell of Rhode Island granted a temporary restraining order providing that the Administration “shall not pause, freeze, impede, block, cancel, or terminate… awards and obligations to provide federal financial assistance to the States, and… shall not impede the States’ access to such awards and obligations” except as authorized by statute, regulation or terms of the award. US District Court for the District of Rhode Island
- The Court also prohibits the Administration from re-issuing the freeze under another guise or via individual agencies and requires the Administration to provide written notice of the restraining order to all agencies by 9am Monday.
- The Court found that the Administration’s action “unilaterally suspends the payment of federal funds to the States and others simply by choosing to do so, no matter the authorizing or appropriating statute, the regulatory regime, or the terms of the grant itself. The Executive cites no legal authority allowing it to do so; indeed, no federal law would authorize the Executive’s unilateral action here.”
- The Court found that the Administration’s action violates the constitutional separation of powers and the Administrative Procedure Act, and is contrary to Congress’ intent in funding the various programs.
- Moreover, the Court stated that the Administration’s claim “that the Executive Branch has a duty ‘to align Federal spending and action with the will of the American people as expressed through Presidential priorities,’ is a constitutionally flawed statement. The Executive Branch has a duty to align federal spending and action with the will of the people as expressed through congressional appropriations, not through ‘Presidential priorities.'”
- The Court further noted that the Administration failed to follow the notification procedures established by the Impoundment Control Act under which Presidents may temporarily pause funding or seek to rescind funding.
- Finally, the Court quoted Justice Kavanaugh’s 2013 opinion when he was on the DC Circuit that with respect to “the suggestion that the President has a constitutional power to decline to spend appropriated funds, we must conclude that existence of such a broad power is supported by neither reason nor precedent.”
Wed, Jan 29, 2025: Trump’s federal spending power grab is far from over – WashPost/Ruth Marcus
Wed, Jan 29, 2025: Trump wants to impound money that Congress appropriated. Here’s what it means — Bloomberg
Mon, Jan 27, 2025: Trump’s move to freeze appropriated funds under the Inflation Reduction Act and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law may violate Impoundment Control Act – The Hill
According to OMB Director nominee Russell Vought, “The president ran on the notion that the Impoundment Control Act is unconstitutional. I agree with that.”
Fri, Jan 24, 2025: Trump’s illegal, unconstitutional scheme to withhold funding headed to communities across America – Murray
Wed, Jan 22, 2025: Trump’s budget pick is famous for defying Congress; GOP senators want to confirm him anyway – Politico
Wed, Jan 22, 2025: Allies of OMB Director nominee vote articulate why they believe the Impoundment Control Act is unconstitutional. – X
Wed, Jan 15, 2022: Trump’s budget chief previews constitutional clash over spending – FiscalTimes
Fri, Dec. 6, 2024: How Trump plans to steal Congress’ power of the purse – DeLauro
Fact Sheet: Trump’s Impoundment–Uninformed & Unconstitutional
Thurs, Dec. 5, 2024: House Appropriations Chair Cole signals openness to presidential impoundments; (the Impoundment Control Act of 1974, enacted in response to President Nixon’s impoundment of congressionally appropriated funds, requires congressional approval to rescind congressionally appropriated funds–a tall order with the GOP’s razor thin majorities in the House and Senate) – WashPost
Thurs, Nov. 21, 2024: Musk’s budget crusade could cause a constitutional clash in Trump’s second term – AP