 |
By The RepresentUs Team September 5, 2025 |
The fact that you even need to know about this weird, wonky budget move says a lot about the current state of American politics. But Pocket rescissions are not just some boring technicality; they’re actually an illegal power grab by the Executive Branch that’s an attack on our system of checks and balances.
We’ll break it down as simply as possible so you can understand why this is such a big deal and why Congress’s inaction is making things worse.
Why are we talking about this in the first place?
The White House recently announced a plan to cancel nearly $5 billion in funding for foreign aid initiatives that had previously been approved and passed by Congress.
The White House asking for funding cuts isn’t unusual at all. Recently, the White House had asked for $9 billion in cuts (or rescissions) from funding that had already been previously allocated by Congress (for foreign aid and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, among other things), and Congress approved those cuts.
What’s different this time: The White House isn’t asking for Congress’s participation or approval in these new funding cuts; they’re acting unilaterally and using an obscure interpretation of a law to bypass Congress and justify their actions.
Very important: Only Congress has the “power of the purse”
This isn’t up for debate. It’s in the Constitution:
Article I, Section 8: “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes… to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States.”
This constitutional power is commonly called the “power of the purse.” Congress decides how money is raised and how it’s spent.
It's one of the strongest checks that Congress has over the Executive Branch: Congress can influence the Executive Branch by funding or withholding funds on certain initiatives and make sure that the will of the people is represented in how money is raised and spent.
Rescissions are a totally cool and normal thing in government spending
A rescission is the formal process of canceling funds that Congress already set aside in the budget. Instead of being spent, that money is “rescinded” and returned to the Treasury.
For example, if Congress sets aside $500 million for new Coast Guard ships, but after lining up contracts finds that the real cost is only $400 million, they may pass a rescissions law to bring back that leftover funding so the funds aren’t wasted.
Rescissions can only be enacted by Congress, through law.
➡️ However, the president can play a role in proposing rescissions through a law called the Impoundment Control Act. This law allows the president to suggest what funds should be canceled and why, and it gives Congress 45 days to say yes or no (This is the exact process that unfolded when the White House proposed the $9 billion in cuts that Congress approved). This mechanism between the president and Congress has been used quite a bit since this Act became law–243 times to be exact since 1974.
If Congress doesn’t agree with the president’s proposal, the funds must still be spent exactly as the law originally required.
Pocket rescissions are not cool, not normal, and are an illegal power grab
Pocket rescissions are an illegal twist on the process laid out by the Impoundment Control Act (ICA). Under the ICA, the president can propose a rescission, and Congress gets 45 days to consider it. During that time, the money is temporarily frozen, but if Congress says no or does nothing within that window, the funds must still be spent as originally intended.
Here’s where the abuse comes in: the president waits until the very end of the fiscal year (which ends September 30) to send a rescission request. Most funds allocated by Congress come with a built-in expiration date, usually the end of that fiscal year. By waiting until the last minute, the president can:
- Freeze the money during the supposed 45-day review period
- Run out the clock until September 30
- Let the funds expire without Congress ever having a meaningful chance to act
In other words: Congress passed a law to spend the money, but the president blocks it by stalling until the funds disappear.
This is illegal. The Government Accountability Office (Congress’s non-partisan in-house watchdog) has ruled that pocket rescissions are illegal and an abuse of power, and many senior lawmakers, even from the president’s own party, agree.
Congress is not powerless to stop this. They’re just cowardly.
The use of pocket rescissions is just another example in a long list of instances where the Executive Branch has trampled on our constitutional system of checks and balances and Congress has stood on the sidelines and let it happen. It’s happened with tariffs, the unchecked expansion of ICE, the abuse of executive orders, and now it’s happening with pocket rescissions.
"Article I of the Constitution makes clear that Congress has the responsibility for the power of the purse. Any effort to rescind appropriated funds without congressional approval is a clear violation of the law."
– Sen. Susan Collin, Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee
Congress could shut down this loophole and clarify the law tomorrow. The House and Senate Appropriations Committees are some of the most powerful committees in Congress who have the authority to advance legislation to close budget loopholes, enforce the ICA, and defend their own constitutional powers, but no one is doing anything.
We have to force Congress to do their job.
The only way to make Congress act to defend our system of checks and balances is for the public to demand it. If enough of us speak up, we can put pressure on them to close this loophole and protect their constitutional role.
👉 Add your name to our petition today and send a message to Congress telling them to do their job.