The New York Times gift article: “The president’s top aides have signaled they may seize on a timing quirk in law to cancel enacted funds, setting up a clash over the power of the purse. The White House is signaling it may soon invoke a little-known and legally untested power to try to cancel billions of dollars in federal spending, as President Trump’s top aides look for novel ways to reconfigure the budget without obtaining the explicit approval of Congress. Under the emerging plan, the Trump administration would wait until closer to Sept. 30, the end of the fiscal year, to formally ask lawmakers to claw back a set of funds it has targeted for cuts. Even if Congress fails to vote on the request, the president’s timing would trigger a law that freezes the money until it ultimately expires. The idea is known as a pocket rescission, and it has been invoked only in limited circumstances over the past half-century. The Government Accountability Office, a nonpartisan oversight body that reports to Capitol Hill, ruled during the first Trump administration that pocket rescission is illegal, citing Supreme Court precedent as it reversed its previous stance that the law may permit the power’s use. But Russell T. Vought, the director of the Office of Management and Budget, has increasingly brandished the maneuver as an ultimatum to Congress, warning the White House may test the limits of its authority to act unilaterally unless Congress hastens its work to cut spending. Mr. Vought has said pocket rescission could also allow the administration to achieve some of the deep cuts identified by the Department of Government Efficiency.
If the White House proceeds, its actions could touch off a high-stakes legal battle over the power of the purse, which the Constitution affords to Congress. Mr. Vought at times has openly courted this sort of showdown, as he broadly asserts that the president wields expansive powers over federal spending. “It’s a provision that has been rarely used, but it is there,” Mr. Vought said in little-noticed remarks on pocket rescission during a recent appearance on CNN. “And we intend to use all of these tools.” Mr. Vought teased the idea again on a call with reporters earlier in June, describing pocket rescission as a tool to cut spending “without having to get an affirmative vote” from Congress. Appearing at a House hearing that same week, Mr. Vought stressed to lawmakers there were “all manner of provisions” available to the president to enact his fiscal vision. “The whole point of the law is to make sure that funds are prudently obligated,” said Bobby Kogan, a budget aide under former President Joseph R. Biden Jr. who is now serving as senior director of federal budget policy at the Center for American Progress, a left-leaning group. “This would deny that.” Mr. Vought’s claims illustrate the widening chasm between Democrats in Congress and the White House over the future of the nation’s budget. The feud originated in the early days of Mr. Trump’s term, when he froze nearly all federal spending in a move that foreshadowed the aggressive tactics he would employ to conform the budget to his political views…”
