U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Susan Collins, R-Maine, speaks with reporters inside the Capitol building in Washington, D.C., on Monday, Sept. 29, 2025. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — The chairwoman of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee said Tuesday the Government Accountability Office should sue the Trump administration over its efforts to freeze or unilaterally cancel spending approved by Congress. 

“I believe that GAO, which is empowered under the Impoundment and Budget Control Act of 1974 to sue in cases, should do so,” Sen. Susan Collins said. “The GAO has found seven instances in which the (impoundments) violate the act and it has standing to sue.”

Collins, R-Maine, also told reporters that she doesn’t agree with the Supreme Court’s decision last week on its emergency docket that allows the Trump administration to cancel $4 billion in foreign aid. 

“I disagree with the Supreme Court’s temporary decision, but it was not a decision that delved into the merits of the case,” Collins said. “That’s yet to come.”

Collins, one of the more vocal members of her party over preserving Congress’ constitutional power of the purse, said “Well, let’s see,” when asked if she expects the GAO, a government watchdog agency, would win a lawsuit over the Trump administration impounding funds. 

The GAO and White House budget office did not immediately respond to a request for comment. 

Funds frozen for libraries, medical research, FEMA

Republicans in Congress have been either supportive or relatively quiet about the Trump administration’s efforts to freeze or cancel funding approved by Congress. 

The GAO has cited the Trump administration for illegally impounding funding for electric vehicle charging, museums and libraries, Head Start, energy efficiency upgrades in K-12 schools, funding for medical research at the National Institutes of Health and funding for the Federal Emergency Management Agency. 

Senate Appropriations Committee ranking member Patty Murray, D-Wash., released a statement earlier this week rebuking the Trump administration’s actions after the GAO released its seventh impoundment decision. 

“Today, we have another stark reminder of how President Trump’s lawless assault on our spending laws is hurting real people in every part of the country—as funding is held up to address homelessness, prepare for disasters, and much more,” Murray wrote. “It is time for Republicans to join us in insisting that every last penny that is owed to the American people gets out to the American people.”

White House budget director Russell Vought speaks with reporters inside the U.S. Capitol on July 15, 2025. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — The White House budget office moved Friday to yank nearly $5 billion in foreign aid already approved by Congress in a controversial maneuver meant to bypass lawmakers.

The so-called pocket rescission, which a top congressional watchdog and the Republican chairwoman of the Senate Appropriations Committee have called illegal, would pull funding that Congress has already approved for the State Department to fulfill overseas commitments.

The nonpartisan Government Accountability Office has deemed such actions to circumvent Congress unlawful. And Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins said Friday that “any effort to rescind appropriated funds without congressional approval is a clear violation of the law.”

“Given that this package was sent to Congress very close to the end of the fiscal year when the funds are scheduled to expire, this is an apparent attempt to rescind appropriated funds without congressional approval,” the Maine Republican said in a statement. 

According to a summary provided by Senate Appropriations ranking Democrat Patty Murray, the move would claw back $3.2 billion from the State Department’s Development Assistance account that funds food security programs, works to limit irregular migration to the U.S. and to strengthen the market for U.S. companies involved in climate issues to expand overseas.

It would also remove $913 million in U.S. treaty dues to the United Nations to support peacekeeping missions; $445 million in security assistance from the State Department’s Peacekeeping Operations, particularly in Africa; and $322 million from the Democracy Fund, according to Murray’s office.

The White House Office of Management and Budget did not respond to a message seeking the request. 

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a statement that President Donald Trump is “using his authority under the Impoundment Control Act to deploy a pocket rescission, cancelling $5 billion in foreign aid and international organization funding that violates the President’s America First priorities.”

“None of these programs are in America’s interest, which is why the President is taking decisive action to put America and Americans first,” Rubio said.

Frustration from Congress

When the White House makes a request to Congress to claw back funding already approved, the payments are withheld for 45 days while lawmakers make a decision to approve the rescission or not. Because there are fewer than 45 days before the end of the current fiscal year, funding is essentially paused indefinitely, regardless if Congress approves the move.

As lawmakers face an Oct. 1 deadline in order to avoid a government shutdown, the rescission has already drawn frustration on Capitol Hill.

Murray, of Washington state, blasted the rescission request. 

“Donald Trump wants to zero out more bipartisan investments in our national security and global leadership,” Murray said in a statement. “This time, however, he is attempting to do an end run around Congress altogether. No lawmaker should accept this absurd, illegal ploy to steal their constitutional power to determine how taxpayer dollars get spent.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer slammed the Trump administration for withdrawing funds approved on a bipartisan basis. 

“As the country stares down next month’s government funding deadline on September 30th, it is clear neither President Trump nor Congressional Republicans  have any plan to avoid a painful and entirely unnecessary shutdown,” the New York Democrat said in a statement. 

Pennsylvania Democrat Brendan Boyle, who is the top Democrat on the U.S. House Budget Committee, said in a statement the rescission wasn’t “worth the paper it’s printed on,” and criticized Trump and White House budget director Russell Vought by name.

“It is deeply alarming, plainly illegal, and a blatant abuse of power,” Boyle said. “Congress approved this funding on a bipartisan basis, and the Constitution is clear: it is Congress—not the President—that holds the power of the purse. With this illegal power grab, Donald Trump and Russell Vought are driving us toward a government shutdown.”

This is the Trump administration’s second rescissions request to Congress. The first, which Congress approved, yanked $9 billion in congressionally approved funding. That included about $1.1 billion for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, such as National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting Service, for two fiscal years. It also clawed back $8 billion of foreign aid. 

President Donald Trump holds up an executive order after signing it during an indoor inauguration parade at the Capital One Arena on Jan. 20, 2025 in Washington, D.C.  (Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — A federal appeals court on Wednesday overturned a lower court’s ruling that had required the Trump administration to spend foreign aid dollars approved by Congress.

But instead of addressing the central argument of the lawsuit — that a president cannot refuse to spend money approved by lawmakers, who hold the power of the purse — the Circuit Court in a potentially significant decision said the organizations that filed the case didn’t have the authority to do so.

Judge Karen LeCraft Henderson wrote in her 33-page opinion that only the comptroller general, who leads the Government Accountability Office, has the power to bring lawsuits when a president impounds, or refuses to spend, congressionally approved funds.  The GAO is an independent, non-partisan watchdog agency that works for Congress.

“Because the grantees lack a cause of action, we need not address on the merits whether the government violated the Constitution by infringing on the Congress’s spending power through alleged violations of the 2024 Appropriations Act, the ICA and the Anti-Deficiency Act,” Henderson wrote. The ICA is the Impoundment Control Act, which is the legal mechanism through which the president can delay or withhold funds.

Henderson was nominated to the Circuit Court in 1990 by President George H.W. Bush, a few years after President Ronald Reagan nominated her as a federal district judge in 1986.

Henderson wrote that she and Judge Gregory G. Katsas, who was nominated by President Donald Trump, concluded “the district court abused its discretion in granting a preliminary injunction” for several reasons.

Both Republican and Democratic state attorneys general filed amicus briefs in the case, with Republicans siding with the Trump administration. The case originated when Trump signed an order on Inauguration Day freezing certain foreign aid spending.

Henderson wrote that “within weeks, the State Department and USAID suspended or terminated thousands of grant awards.”

‘It is our responsibility to check the president’

Judge Florence Y. Pan, who was nominated by President Joe Biden, issued a 46-page dissenting opinion, arguing the ruling from her two colleagues was “procedurally and substantively flawed.”

“It is our responsibility to check the President when he violates the law and exceeds his constitutional authority,” Pan wrote. “We fail to do that here.”

Pan wrote she disagreed with the majority’s opinion that Trump withholding certain foreign aid funding was “a mere violation of the Impoundment Control Act that should be addressed by the Comptroller General.”

“In this case, the President’s violation of the Impoundment Control Act is a sideshow,” Pan wrote. “That statute provided a mechanism for the President to lawfully attempt to impound the funds, and his failure to follow its prescribed procedures is evidence that he was, in fact, refusing to obligate the funds in defiance of Congress.”

Public media funding targeted

The Trump administration has used the Impoundment Control Act one time this year, when it requested Congress cancel $9.4 billion in funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and various foreign aid programs.

The House voted mostly along party lines to approve the full request in mid-June.

Senate Republicans approved the bill in July after preserving full funding for the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, or PEPFAR.

House GOP lawmakers then cleared the bill for Trump’s signature just before a 45-day clock ran out.

Trump administration sees ‘big win’

Several members of the Trump administration, including Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought and Attorney General Pam Bondi, cheered the Circuit Court’s ruling in social media posts.

“In a 2-1 ruling, the DC Circuit lifted an injunction ordering President Trump to spend hard-earned taxpayer dollars on wasteful foreign aid projects,” Bondi wrote. “We will continue to successfully protect core Presidential authorities from judicial overreach.”

Vought wrote the ruling was a “Big win!”

An OMB spokesperson wrote in a statement the ruling represented a victory for the White House.

“Radical left dark-money groups have been using the court system to seize control of U.S. foreign policy,” the spokesperson wrote. “Today’s decision stops these private groups from maliciously interfering with the President’s ability to spend responsibly and administer foreign aid in a lawful manner and in alignment with his America First policies.”

Lauren Bateman, attorney at Public Citizen Litigation Group and lead counsel on the suit, wrote in a statement that the court’s ruling represented “a significant setback for the rule of law and risks further erosion of basic separation of powers principles.

“We will seek further review from the court, and our lawsuit will continue regardless as we seek permanent relief from the Administration’s unlawful termination of the vast majority of foreign assistance. In the meantime, countless people will suffer disease, starvation, and death from the Administration’s unconscionable decision to withhold life-saving aid from the world’s most vulnerable people.”

The James H. Shannon Building (Building One) on the NIH campus in Bethesda, Maryland. (Photo by Lydia Polimeni,/National Institutes of Health)

President Donald Trump’s freeze on $8 billion of congressionally appropriated funding to the National Institutes of Health was illegal, the Government Accountability Office reported Tuesday.

Orders Trump signed in the early days of his return to office and related administration directives violated the Impoundment Control Act by failing to spend money that Congress, which holds the power of the purse under the Constitution, had approved, the GAO report said.

Roughly 1,800 grants for health research were held up by the administration, the report said.

Trump’s Inauguration Day order ceased funding for a variety of health research grants that related to diversity, equity and inclusion, transgender issues or environmental harms. The Department of Health and Human Services issued a memo directing its agencies, including NIH, to cease publishing notices in the Federal Register of meetings of grant review boards.

GAO, an independent investigatory agency that reports to Congress, called those meetings “a key step in NIH’s grant review process.” HHS has since restarted notices of the meetings.

From February to June, the NIH released $8 billion less than it obligated in the past two years, representing a drop-off of more than one-third, according to the GAO. The gap between 2025 spending and that of previous years continued to grow, GAO said, with NIH obligating a lower amount of grant funding each month.

Illegal impoundment

The failure to fund grant awards violated the Impoundment Control Act and the Constitution, which certified Congress as the branch of government responsible for funding decisions, said GAO.

If a law is passed by Congress and signed by a president, it must be carried out by the executive branch, the watchdog said.

“The President must ‘faithfully execute’ the law as Congress enacts it,” the report said. “Once enacted, an appropriation is a law like any other, and the President must implement it by ensuring that appropriated funds are obligated and expended prudently during their period of availability unless and until Congress enacts another law providing otherwise. … The Constitution grants the President no unilateral authority to withhold funds from obligation.”

There are specific circumstances that allow for a funding freeze — a rescissions law, such as the one Congress passed last month to defund public broadcasters and foreign aid, is one example — but they did not apply to this case, the GAO said.

Delays may be permissible to allow a new presidential administration to ensure grants are awarded based on its priorities. But a complete block on funding is illegal, the GAO said. There is no evidence that other grant awards — or any other type of funding at HHS — took the place of the $8 billion in unspent grant money, the report said.

“While it can be argued that NIH reviewed grants to ensure that funds were spent in alignment with the priorities of the new administration, NIH did not simply delay the planned obligations of the funds,” the GAO said. “Rather, NIH eliminated obligations entirely by terminating grants it had already awarded.”

GAO can sue the executive branch based on its findings. The report noted there is already litigation from other parties over the frozen grants.

Dems call for reinstatement

Congressional Democrats responded to the report by harshly criticizing Trump and White House Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought and calling for the funds’ release.

“This is simple – Congress passed and the President signed into law investments in NIH research to help find cures and treatments for cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, ALS, diabetes, mental health issues, and maternal mortality,” U.S. House Appropriations Committee ranking Democrat Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut said in a statement. “But now, GAO has determined that President Trump and OMB Director Vought illegally withheld billions in funding for research on diseases affecting millions of American families—research that brings hope to countless people suffering.”

Senate Appropriations Vice Chair Patty Murray, a Washington state Democrat, said in a statement the funding freeze “dangerously set back” efforts to cure cancer, Alzheimer’s and other diseases.

“Today’s decision affirms what we’ve known for months: President Trump is illegally blocking funding for medical research and shredding the hopes of patients across the country who are counting on NIH-backed research to propel new treatments and cures that could save their lives,” Murray said. “It is critical President Trump reverse course, stop decimating the NIH, and get every last bit of this funding out.”

An HHS spokesperson deferred a request for comment Tuesday to OMB.

An agency investigated by the GAO is generally given a draft of the watchdog’s findings and asked to respond.

The HHS response, obtained by States Newsroom, said grant reviews were back on schedule, though it did not address grant obligations.

“Despite the short delay in scheduling and holding peer review and advisory council meetings to allow for the administration transition, NIH has been on pace with its reviewing grant applications and holding meetings and has caught up from the pause when compared to prior years,” the response said.

GAO’s summary of the HHS response said the department had restarted meetings of grant review boards and provided some “factual information” but did not justify the lack of grant spending or provide current status of payments for previously approved grants. 

Federal payments for Head Start this year were significantly behind schedule compared with 2024 and that violated the Impoundment Control Act, according to the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office. (Photo by SDI Productions via Getty Images)

The Health and Human Services Department illegally withheld payments from Head Start for the first months of President Donald Trump’s term, a government watchdog reported Wednesday.

HHS payments for Head Start this year were significantly behind schedule compared with 2024. That violated the Impoundment Control Act, a law governing the president’s duty to spend congressionally appropriated funds, according to a report from the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office.

The law, sometimes called the ICA, allows the president to withhold appropriated funds in some circumstances. But the publicly available data did not show those conditions were met and HHS did not mount any defense prior to the report’s publication, according to the GAO.

“Because that evidence indicates that HHS withheld appropriated funds from expenditure, and because the burden to justify such withholdings rests with HHS and the executive branch, we conclude that HHS violated the ICA by withholding funds,” the report said.

Before the report’s publication, HHS did not provide the GAO with information requested by the watchdog or a legal analysis, according to the report, which was signed by GAO General Counsel Edda Emmanuelli Perez.

However, an HHS spokesperson told States Newsroom in a Wednesday email that it would respond to the GAO and disputed the report’s conclusion.

“HHS did not impound Head Start funds and disputes the conclusion of the GAO report,” the spokesperson wrote. “GAO should anticipate a forthcoming response from HHS to incorporate into an updated report.”

How Head Start works

Head Start is a federal grant program to fund pre-kindergarten services for low-income families. The federal government provides up to 80% of a local program’s eligible costs, the report said. As of last year, 1,600 organizations received Head Start funding for education, nutritional, health and social services.

Organizations receiving Head Start funding generally win grant approvals for five years at a time. Programs in good standing are automatically renewed, according to the report.

Mere days after Trump took office in January, dozens of Head Start grant recipients found they were unable to access funds they’d expected from HHS, according to a Jan. 28 statement from the National Head Start Association, a coalition of grantees.

GAO’s analysis showed the department disbursed about one-third less grant funding in the first three months of the Trump administration than it had over the same period in 2024. The difference amounted to $825 million less for Head Start grants over those months.

The law does allow for HHS to stop funding for grantees before the end of the five-year period under certain circumstances, such as for failing to meet performance standards or becoming under-enrolled.

In those cases, though, HHS must warn the programs of potential cuts in grants, provide a detailed plan the organization can implement to avoid grant cancellation and give the grantee a fair hearing as well as the ability to apply for refunding — all before funding can be cut off, according to the GAO report.

There is no indication HHS took any of those steps before abruptly cutting funds in January, according to the report.

‘The president is not a king’

Sen. Patty Murray, the top Democrat on the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee, blasted President Donald Trump and his HHS in a lengthy statement that asserted Congress’ power over spending decisions and admonished the administration for harming an important program for working families.

“Trump has signaled he would like to eliminate Head Start—but that’s not his choice to make,” Murray said. “Congress delivered this funding for Head Start on a bipartisan basis, and instead of trying to destroy preschool programs and breaking our laws to hurt working families, President Trump needs to ensure every penny of these funds get out in a timely, consistent way moving forward—and he must also finally get out the rest of the investments he has been robbing the American people of.”

Oregon Democrat Jeff Merkley, the ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, highlighted Congress’ role in directing federal funding, calling on Trump and White House Budget Director Russell Vought to comply with appropriations laws.

“The President is not a king, and laws are not suggestions,” Merkley said in a statement. “Once again, we’re seeing proof that this administration is in clear violation of the law under the Impoundment Control Act. The funds appropriated by Congress are not merely suggestions for Donald Trump and Russ Vought to ignore – these are funds that hardworking families rely on, and Head Start is essential to making sure the doors of opportunity are open to every child in our country.”

ACLU lawsuit

The GAO report did not list any further action the agency would take but did note that litigation over the withheld funding is ongoing.

The American Civil Liberties Union filed a suit in April in federal court in Seattle that included parents and Head Start grant recipients.

The suit described widespread confusion that Head Start organizations experienced when they could not access expected federal funding, compounded by cuts to support staff in regional offices.

No cooperation

The report detailed the lack of participation by HHS in the GAO’s investigation and tied it to a separate legal fight involving a public website.

“HHS has not provided the information we requested regarding factual information and its legal views concerning the potential impoundment of appropriated funds,” the report said.

Without information from the administration, the watchdog based its findings on publicly available data.

The White House Office of Management and Budget added an obstacle to that task, the watchdog said.

The office “removed agency apportionment data from its public websites, which is both contrary to OMB’s duty to make such information publicly available and to GAO’s statutory authority to access such information,” the GAO report said.

On that question, a federal judge on Monday ordered the Trump administration to once again publish details about the pace at which it plans to spend money approved by Congress.

U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia Judge Emmet Sullivan wrote in his ruling that Congress “has sweeping authority” to require the president to post a website detailing how it doles out taxpayer dollars throughout the year.