Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Lawless, brazen, unconstitutional
https://prospect.org/politics/2025-01-28-trumps-most-lawless-action-yet/Showdown at the DC corral.
Trump’s Most Lawless Action Yet
It does not matter what executive action Trump takes; he cannot limit, halt, or refuse to carry out spending authorized and appropriated by Congress and signed into law.
This action is willful and deliberate. It is designed to pick a fight over spending, and relies on fanciful theories that would render Congress a vestigial organ in the governmental order. It means to nullify the congressional spending power by presidential fiat. And it hopes to spark litigation whereby the judiciary assents to that transfer of power, emasculating itself in the process.
snip
To state clearly, Congress has the constitutional power of the purse. Presidents can sign or veto a budget; that’s the extent of their role. After that, they must take care that the laws are faithfully executed. Refusing to spend money because of a policy preference is the opposite of faithful execution. The Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel in 1988 agreed that there just isn’t any authority for presidents to defy appropriated funding.
The Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (ICA) intended to take care of the tensions that can crop up when a president asserts the power to nullify spending appropriated by Congress. Richard Nixon, himself an enthusiastic impounder, signed it into law. The ICA established a specific process to rescind certain spending: Presidents must deliver a “special message” to Congress proposing rescissions that Congress must then approve. If Congress declines to do so, the money cannot be held up for more than 45 days. There’s a second process called “deferral,” where presidents can propose a delay of funding if they find operational efficiencies or need to provide for contingencies. But even deferral can only last until the end of a fiscal year, and it cannot be due to policy differences.
This action is willful and deliberate. It is designed to pick a fight over spending, and relies on fanciful theories that would render Congress a vestigial organ in the governmental order. It means to nullify the congressional spending power by presidential fiat. And it hopes to spark litigation whereby the judiciary assents to that transfer of power, emasculating itself in the process.
snip
To state clearly, Congress has the constitutional power of the purse. Presidents can sign or veto a budget; that’s the extent of their role. After that, they must take care that the laws are faithfully executed. Refusing to spend money because of a policy preference is the opposite of faithful execution. The Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel in 1988 agreed that there just isn’t any authority for presidents to defy appropriated funding.
The Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (ICA) intended to take care of the tensions that can crop up when a president asserts the power to nullify spending appropriated by Congress. Richard Nixon, himself an enthusiastic impounder, signed it into law. The ICA established a specific process to rescind certain spending: Presidents must deliver a “special message” to Congress proposing rescissions that Congress must then approve. If Congress declines to do so, the money cannot be held up for more than 45 days. There’s a second process called “deferral,” where presidents can propose a delay of funding if they find operational efficiencies or need to provide for contingencies. But even deferral can only last until the end of a fiscal year, and it cannot be due to policy differences.
More.
3 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
