DrWeb<p><strong>Civil Discourse – Congress may have the spending power, but Trump can usurp it if they won’t protect it. And they haven’t. – Joyce Vance</strong></p><p>By <a href="https://substack.com/@joycevance" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">Joyce Vance</a>, Aug 13, 2025</p><p>This afternoon, a three-judge panel in the D.C. Circuit signed off on the Trump administration’s efforts to block funds for foreign assistance that have been appropriated by Congress. Despite arguments made by the plaintiffs that this violates Congress’ Article II Spending powers, <a href="https://media.cadc.uscourts.gov/opinions/docs/2025/08/25-5097-2129854.pdf" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">the court ruled</a> that only the head of the Government Accountability Office (GAO) has the ability to bring Impoundment Control Act (ICA) claims. Impoundment refers to a decision by a president to delay spending or withhold funds that Congress has allocated in the budget. The GAO was not a party to this lawsuit, although it has made <a href="https://www.narfe.org/blog/2025/07/29/gao-finds-trump-administration-violated-impoundment-control-act-by-withholding-head-start-funds/" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">multiple</a> <a href="https://www.npr.org/2025/05/23/nx-s1-5409080/trump-white-house-impoundment-gao" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">findings</a> <a href="https://www.taxpayer.net/budget-appropriations-tax/recent-gao-decisions-demonstrate-the-limits-of-impoundment/" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">that</a> this administration has violated the ICA in other regards.</p><p>The court’s decision was 2-1, with Judges Karen Henderson and Gregory Katsas in the majority and Judge Florence Pan dissenting. As Judge Pan notes in dissent, they reframed the issues argued by the government in order to rule in its favor, so that they could “excuse the government’s forfeiture of what they perceive to be a key argument, and then rule in the President’s favor on that ground, thus departing from procedural norms that are designed to safeguard the court’s impartiality and independence.” There will likely be a motion to ask the full court to rehear the case <em>en banc</em>, with all active judges sitting, before the losing party takes it to the Supreme Court.</p><a class="" href="https://i0.wp.com/substackcdn.com/image/fetch/%24s_%215msQ%21%2Cf_auto%2Cq_auto%3Agood%2Cfl_progressive%3Asteep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F9da4a29f-3da8-486b-8b31-ad62e5ff4d7b_1638x1588.png?ssl=1" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"></a><p>The case arose after Trump impounded funds appropriated by Congress for foreign aid in 2024. On January 20, 2025, Trump issued an executive order directing the State Department and U.S. Agency for International Development to freeze foreign aid spending. Multiple plaintiffs sued to force the administration to release the funds. After the district court issued a preliminary injunction that prevented the government from refusing to fund the programs Congress had voted for, the administration appealed, and the court of appeals heard the case on an expedited basis.</p><p>The Constitution gives Congress the authority to raise revenue and decide how money is spent—the power of the purse—in Article I, Section 8, which permits Congress to tax and spend for the general welfare, and in Article I, Section 9, which provides that “No money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law.” The executive branch can’t legally spend public money without Congressional authorization. This means Congress can prevent a president from doing things it doesn’t approve of by refusing to fund them. But this case involves a different situation—what happens when Congress funds a program, but the president refuses to release the funds? The Impoundment Control Act was passed in 1974 to reinforce Congress’s spending authority after President Nixon tried to withhold appropriated funds.</p><p>Nixon wasn’t the first to try and thwart Congressional spending decisions. Thomas Jefferson <a href="https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/1956/july/jeffersons-plans-mothballing-frigates" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">delayed spending</a> on naval ships out of concern over costs. But Nixon used impoundment aggressively over policy disagreements with the Congress. In the early 1970s, he withheld billions of dollars from environmental programs and housing and education initiatives. Congress viewed Nixon’s broad use of impoundment as an end run around its constitutional powers, arguing that if he could simply refuse to spend, a president could appropriate a line item veto over the budget for himself, in contravention of Congress’ power of the purse. Lawsuits were filed.</p><p>Continue/Read Original Article Here: <em><a href="https://joycevance.substack.com/p/congress-may-have-the-spending-power?publication_id=607357&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=email-share&triggerShare=true&r=1gx2e" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">Congress may have the spending power, but Trump can usurp it if they won’t protect it.</a></em></p> <p>Original article: <a href="https://joycevance.substack.com/p/congress-may-have-the-spending-power" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">View source</a></p><p><a rel="nofollow noopener" class="hashtag u-tag u-category" href="https://drwebdomain.blog/tag/2025/" target="_blank">#2025</a> <a rel="nofollow noopener" class="hashtag u-tag u-category" href="https://drwebdomain.blog/tag/america/" target="_blank">#America</a> <a rel="nofollow noopener" class="hashtag u-tag u-category" href="https://drwebdomain.blog/tag/donald-trump/" target="_blank">#DonaldTrump</a> <a rel="nofollow noopener" class="hashtag u-tag u-category" href="https://drwebdomain.blog/tag/federal-courts/" target="_blank">#FederalCourts</a> <a rel="nofollow noopener" class="hashtag u-tag u-category" href="https://drwebdomain.blog/tag/health/" target="_blank">#Health</a> <a rel="nofollow noopener" class="hashtag u-tag u-category" href="https://drwebdomain.blog/tag/history/" target="_blank">#History</a> <a rel="nofollow noopener" class="hashtag u-tag u-category" href="https://drwebdomain.blog/tag/libraries/" target="_blank">#Libraries</a> <a rel="nofollow noopener" class="hashtag u-tag u-category" href="https://drwebdomain.blog/tag/library/" target="_blank">#Library</a> <a rel="nofollow noopener" class="hashtag u-tag u-category" href="https://drwebdomain.blog/tag/library-of-congress/" target="_blank">#LibraryOfCongress</a> <a rel="nofollow noopener" class="hashtag u-tag u-category" href="https://drwebdomain.blog/tag/politics/" target="_blank">#Politics</a> <a rel="nofollow noopener" class="hashtag u-tag u-category" href="https://drwebdomain.blog/tag/resistance/" target="_blank">#Resistance</a> <a rel="nofollow noopener" class="hashtag u-tag u-category" href="https://drwebdomain.blog/tag/science/" target="_blank">#Science</a> <a rel="nofollow noopener" class="hashtag u-tag u-category" href="https://drwebdomain.blog/tag/substack/" target="_blank">#Substack</a> <a rel="nofollow noopener" class="hashtag u-tag u-category" href="https://drwebdomain.blog/tag/trump/" target="_blank">#Trump</a> <a rel="nofollow noopener" class="hashtag u-tag u-category" href="https://drwebdomain.blog/tag/trump-administration/" target="_blank">#TrumpAdministration</a> <a rel="nofollow noopener" class="hashtag u-tag u-category" href="https://drwebdomain.blog/tag/u-s-congress/" target="_blank">#USCongress</a> <a rel="nofollow noopener" class="hashtag u-tag u-category" href="https://drwebdomain.blog/tag/united-states/" target="_blank">#UnitedStates</a></p>