How a 1974 law prohibits presidents from blocking congressional spending
President Donald Trump and his administration have suggested they can simply ignore laws passed by Congress.
As President Donald Trump and his administration try to unilaterally halt federal spending on things they do not like, members of Congress are responding by pointing out that under the Constitution and a law enacted 51 years ago, the executive branch does not have the power to impound appropriations.
What is the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974? What does it cover, and why did Congress pass it?
The Constitution
In Article 1, Section 9, which described the limits of the Congress’ authority, the U.S. Constitution sets out a clear process for spending federal money: “No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law.” Congress passes spending legislation, which the president can sign or veto, and then it falls to the executive branch to make sure that the law is followed.
Attempts by the president to stop or delay paying out the money committed by Congress in an appropriations law are known as impoundment. According to the 2010 revision of a report by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, presidents have tried to impound funds since the early 1800s.
After he was reelected in 1972, Republican President Richard Nixon attempted to ignore appropriations laws funding domestic spending programs he opposed. Rather than work with the Democratic-led Congress to change the law, his administration simply decided to withhold appropriated funds designated for housing programs, disaster relief, and clean water.
Impoundment Control Act
To protect the appropriations process, Congress overwhelmingly voted to pass the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974, which establishes a process by which presidents need to request and receive permission from the House and Senate to rescind appropriations.
Nixon signed the package on July 12 of that year. Under the law, after asking Congress to cancel an expenditure, a president can delay spending funds for up to 45 days when Congress is in session while awaiting a response. Both the House and Senate need to agree to the cut or the administration must spend the money.
The law has been on the books for more than five decades.
Trump’s view
In a January 2020 ruling, the U.S. Government Accountability Office found that the first Trump administration had violated the law when it refused to comply with an appropriations law requiring $214 million in security funds be provided to Ukraine in 2019.
Trump, who was simultaneously pressuring Ukraine’s government to announce investigations into his political opponents, denied any wrongdoing. He was impeached in December 2019 on charges of abuse of power and obstruction, but acquitted in a Senate trial in February 2020.
In his 2024 campaign, Trump endorsed the idea of using impoundment as a tool to “Slash Waste, Stop Inflation, and Crush the Deep State”; called the Impoundment Control Act “clearly unconstitutional, a blatant violation of the separation of powers”; and promised to challenge it in court and get it overturned.
Democrats in Congress say Trump is flat-out wrong. “Unilaterally slashing funds that have been lawfully appropriated by the people’s elected representatives in Congress would be a devastating power grab that undermines our economy and puts families and communities at risk,” said House Budget Committee ranking member Brandan Boyle (D-PA) in a November statement. “House Democrats are ready to fight back against any illegal attempt to gut the programs that keep American families safe and help them make ends meet.”
On Jan. 27, the White House issued a memorandum announcing a freeze on all disbursements of funds related to “financial assistance for foreign aid, nongovernmental organizations, DEI, woke gender ideology, and the green new deal.” Two days later, it withdrew the memorandum after a federal judge temporarily put its implementation on hold.
What could be affected
If a president is able to simply ignore appropriations laws, all federal spending could be affected.
Trump has opposed an array of government programs, including the Affordable Care Act, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the Department of Education, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency. If impoundment is allowed, those and other safety net programs could unilaterally be cut without any action by Congress.
Repeated attempts to reach the White House press office for comment for this story were unsuccessful.
