#pocketrescission — Public Fediverse posts
Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #pocketrescission, aggregated by home.social.
-
The next step in the fight is a legally untested maneuver in which the #Trump admin would cancel another $4.9 billion in foreign #aid #spending — this time without congressional approval. The gambit, known as a “#PocketRescission,” involves the White House eliminating the spending unless #Congress votes to stop it by Sept. 30, the end of the fiscal year.
#RussVought #Project2025 #law #democracy #authoritarianism #autocracy #dictatorship #fascism #tyranny
-
The U.S. Supreme Court’s Republican appointees on Friday issued an order
allowing President Donald Trump to unilaterally hold back $4 billion in foreign aid funding
— overturning the decision of Congress that was previously signed into law.It was a ruling that required a willful disregard for some of the most fundamental understandings of America’s federal government
— and prompted a sharp dissent from the Democratic appointees.The shadow docket ruling addressed $4 billion in funds that Trump has asked Congress to rescind under a provision in another law, the Impoundment Control Act.
Congress has not acted on that, however,
meaning the administration is still obligated to spend the money.The unsigned order from the Supreme Court on Friday nonetheless
blocked a lower court’s order that would have required the Trump administration to spend the money by September 30, when that funding expires.As Justice Elena Kagan wrote in dissent for her and Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson,
“The effect is to prevent the funds from reaching their intended recipients—not just now
but (because of their impending expiration) for all time.“https://www.lawdork.com/p/scotus-impoundment-is-ok-when-trump-does-it
-
The U.S. Supreme Court’s Republican appointees on Friday issued an order
allowing President Donald Trump to unilaterally hold back $4 billion in foreign aid funding
— overturning the decision of Congress that was previously signed into law.It was a ruling that required a willful disregard for some of the most fundamental understandings of America’s federal government
— and prompted a sharp dissent from the Democratic appointees.The shadow docket ruling addressed $4 billion in funds that Trump has asked Congress to rescind under a provision in another law, the Impoundment Control Act.
Congress has not acted on that, however,
meaning the administration is still obligated to spend the money.The unsigned order from the Supreme Court on Friday nonetheless
blocked a lower court’s order that would have required the Trump administration to spend the money by September 30, when that funding expires.As Justice Elena Kagan wrote in dissent for her and Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson,
“The effect is to prevent the funds from reaching their intended recipients—not just now
but (because of their impending expiration) for all time.“https://www.lawdork.com/p/scotus-impoundment-is-ok-when-trump-does-it
-
Good explanation of legal maneuvers to not spend $ as allocated by #Congress -
John Roberts allows Trump to withhold #oreignaid funds approved by Congress — for now https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2025/09/09/congress/john-roberts-foreign-aid-funding-supreme-court-decision-00553743
#ImpoundmentControlAct #pocketrescission #budgetcycle #weaponizedincompetence?
-
Susie Madrak reveals a striking strategy from the Trump administration: the use of "pocket rescission" to cut billions in federal spending without Congress. This tactic, highlighted in a New York Times report, raises alarm as it could sidestep legislative processes and disregard public input. The implications are profound for governance and legality. Discover more about this controversial approach in the full article. https://crooksandliars.com/2025/06/project-2025-author-hints-trump-may #Project2025 #TrumpAdministration #PocketRescission #FederalBudget #Congress #Governance