White House Rescinds Over $800 Million in Government Funds Using a Pocket Rescission Manoeuvre

The White House has moved to rescind $810 million (£611.3 million) in spending approved by Congress, using a disputed 'pocket rescission' just days before the fiscal year ends.

President Donald Trump's administration invoked the Impoundment Control Act on Friday evening to withhold the money, targeting programmes across health, education, housing and justice that it says do not serve American taxpayers.

The manoeuvre has drawn immediate criticism from lawmakers who say it bypasses the legislature's constitutional power of the purse.

The Government Accountability Office says a pocket rescission occurs when a president submits a rescission request so close to the end of the fiscal year that funds expire before Congress can act.

Under the Impoundment Control Act, Congress has 45 days of continuous session to approve a rescission bill; if it does not, the funds must generally be made available for obligation. Critics, including the GAO, argue that timing a request at the eleventh hour effectively prevents obligation without congressional consent, a position the office has maintained since a 2018 legal decision.

Agencies Targeted and the Administration's Rationale

The White House release listed affected agencies including the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Education, the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Department of Justice.

Of the total, $567 million was earmarked for HHS programmes the administration alleges supported 'pro-illegal immigration' efforts and non-governmental organisations serving refugees, asylees and other non-citizens. It also cited Department of Homeland Security programmes it claimed 'laundered taxpayer dollars' to provide welfare to undocumented immigrants.

In a statement, the White House said President Trump was deploying a 'pocket rescission' of funds, the same legally contested manoeuvre it used in 2025 to seek to claw back billions in appropriated foreign aid.

The Supreme Court last September stayed a lower court order that would have required those funds to be obligated, allowing them to remain withheld while litigation continued, but stressed that its order should not be read as a final determination on the merits.

Collins Calls Move a 'Clear Violation' as Legal Dispute Deepens

Senator Susan Collins, the Maine Republican who chairs the Senate Appropriations Committee, denounced the action in a statement posted on social media.

'The independent Government Accountability Office has concluded that pocket rescissions are unlawful and not permitted by the Impoundment Control Act,' she wrote. 'Any effort to rescind appropriated funds without congressional approval is a clear violation of the law.'

Collins said Congress received the $810 million rescission package from the Office of Management and Budget 'without warning or consultation,' alleging the funds had been intentionally withheld for months to execute what she called an unlawful cancellation of bipartisan appropriations.

'OMB is an agency of the executive branch. It does not get to decide which programs are worth funding,' she said, adding that she would work with colleagues to address the 'illegal actions.'

The dispute has raised broader questions about the constitutional division of spending powers between Congress and the executive branch.

The GAO's position is that the Impoundment Control Act does not permit funds to be withheld through their expiration date, while the Trump administration has argued that the law permits the manoeuvre. No court has definitively resolved the underlying legal question.

The legality of the pocket rescission remains contested. The Government Accountability Office has said the Impoundment Control Act does not permit funds to be withheld through their expiration date, while the Trump administration has argued that the law permits the manoeuvre. No court has definitively resolved the underlying legal question.