The administration announced on Friday that it would withhold almost a billion dollars that Congress had already allocated. By employing a scarcely used mechanism known as a pocket rescission the White House effectively cancelled money earmarked for a variety of immigrant services and diversity-oriented programs just days before the federal fiscal year ends on September 30.
The timing of the move left virtually no window for lawmakers to intervene. Under the Impoundment Control Act the executive may request that Congress rescind funds, but Congress has a 45-day review period. By issuing the rescission with only five days left in the budget cycle, the administration ensured that the money would expire without formal congressional approval.
Understanding the “pocket rescission” tool
A pocket rescission occurs when the president’s budget office submits a rescission request so close to the fiscal-year deadline that the funds simply lapse before Congress can act. The Government Accountability Office has repeatedly warned that this practice stretches, if not violates, the language of the Impoundment Control Act, which was designed to prevent the executive from unilaterally nullifying appropriations.
Historically, the last major use of a pocket rescission was in 1977 when President Carter withdrew a small amount of unspent money. In 2025, President Trump employed the same tactic to block $4.9 billion in foreign aid, a decision the Supreme Court allowed to stand on foreign-policy grounds. The 2026 action marks the first time the tool has been turned on domestic spending.
Programs caught in the new cuts
The rescission package touches eleven programs across seven federal departments. The bulk of the reductions—over $560 million—target the Department of Health and Human Services initiatives that assist refugees, asylum seekers, and unaccompanied minors. Additional cuts eliminate $25 million from the Department of Education’s special program for migrant students, $15 million from a Department of Homeland Security grant that provides legal and mental-health assistance to certain immigrants, and $10 million earmarked for the Minority Business Development Agency.
Other affected allocations include $28 million for health-research grants the administration labeled “ideologically driven,” $70 million for international education projects deemed “woke,” and $9 million in debt-relief assistance to foreign nations that fund climate-change policies. The White House justified the cuts by arguing that recent declines in illegal border crossings have lessened the need for many of these services.
Political backlash and constitutional questions
The move provoked swift condemnation from both parties. Senator Susan Collins, a Republican and chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, described the action as an “unlawful impoundment” that usurps Congress’s constitutional power of the purse. She warned that the Office of Management and Budget “does not get to decide which programs are worth funding.”
Democratic Appropriations leader Senator Patty Murray echoed those sentiments, calling the rescission “theft from the American people, plain and simple.” Murray highlighted that the withdrawn money originated from bipartisan legislation intended to aid vulnerable populations, not to serve partisan agendas.
Legal scholars note that while the president may propose rescissions, the executive branch cannot simply let the money expire without congressional consent. The GAO has labeled the recent pocket rescission “illegal,” and several members of Congress have pledged to pursue legislative remedies to restore the funding and clarify the limits of executive authority.
