Tweet Share Share Comment

Sign up for the Slatest to get the most insightful analysis, criticism, and advice out there, delivered to your inbox daily.

On Monday, the Trump administration claimed the authority to unilaterally freeze hundreds of billions of dollars in federal spending, an action that would have effectively shut down thousands of governmental programs that provide crucial, often lifesaving support to millions of people at home and abroad. The scope of this power grab is impossible to overstate, as are its devastating ramifications—which is presumably why the administration attempted to walk back some of the freeze Tuesday in a follow-up memo that created more confusion and uncertainty. Whatever the true scope of this funding suspicion, the upshot is clear: President Donald Trump wants to seize control of the spending power from Congress in order to paralyze large portions of the government, canceling duly enacted appropriations by executive decree. This move is flatly illegal, a flagrant breach of federal law as well as the president’s own constitutional obligations. It tees up a massive legal battle that will test whether this Supreme Court is willing to put any restraints on a president who seeks to rule as a dictator.

The technical term for this freezing of funds is impoundment, and Trump has long sought to weaponize it for his own agenda. During his first term, he “impounded” funds that Congress allocated to Ukraine, withholding the money as leverage to pressure President Volodymyr Zelensky into investigating Joe Biden. (This plot formed the basis of his first impeachment.) Last year, on the campaign trail, Trump promised to impound far more money “to squeeze the bloated federal bureaucracy”; the idea was also touted in Project 2025.

But there’s a flaw in this scheme: Congress forbade it in a 1974 law called the Impoundment Control Act. This measure—enacted in response to President Richard Nixon’s unprecedented abuse of impoundment—strictly limits the executive branch’s authority to withhold appropriated funds. It bars the president from ever impounding “mandatory” spending, including health care programs and Social Security, that’s appropriated indefinitely. And it requires the president to seek Congress’ permission to rescind “discretionary” spending that’s approved each year. (The commander in chief must give a reason for his request.) If Congress does not grant permission within 45 days, the executive branch must spend the money.