The President can't do what you claim. He can put a hold on it while appealing to Congress to act. It's a 45 day process. The courts either rule that he can or cannot do certain things. In this case it's been a legal process. As usual some are not in possession to the facts, or at least don't want to discuss all the facts when they don't fall into their favor.
Under the 1974 Impoundment Control Act, a president cannot unilaterally refuse to spend funds that Congress has previously approved. The president can, however, propose a temporary delay or permanent cancellation of spending, which Congress must then approve.
Temporary deferral
The president can temporarily delay the spending of funds by sending a special message to Congress that outlines the reason for the deferral.
- Allowed reasons: A deferral is only permitted for certain reasons, such as for contingencies, to achieve greater efficiency, or when explicitly provided for by law.
- Congressional check: Congress can pass a resolution to overturn the president's deferral at any time.
- Time limit: A deferral cannot last beyond the end of the fiscal year in which it was proposed.
Permanent rescission
To permanently cancel congressionally approved funds, the president must propose a rescission to Congress.
- Proposal period: Once the president sends a special message to Congress, they can temporarily withhold the funds for up to 45 days while Congress considers the request.
- Congressional approval: For the rescission to become permanent, both the House and the Senate must pass a rescission bill to approve the cancellation. If they do not, the president must release the funds.
Recent challenges to the law
In recent years, the Impoundment Control Act has faced challenges, and its constraints have been disputed.
- Trump administration: During his term, President Trump asserted the authority to withhold funds without explicit congressional approval, which was criticized as an unconstitutional expansion of presidential power.
- Ongoing legal challenges: Some of these actions, particularly regarding foreign aid funds, have resulted in litigation. While lower courts have generally sided against unilateral impoundment, the legality of the matter could eventually be decided by the Supreme Court.
- Government Accountability Office (GAO) role: The nonpartisan GAO, which oversees compliance with the act, can investigate unauthorized impoundments and sue the executive branch to release improperly withheld funds.
