<p class="wp-block-paragraph">President Donald Trump canceled nearly $1 billion in unspent federal funding on September 25, 2026, marking the second "pocket" rescission overall in 50 years, both issued by Trump during his second term.</p>
<p class="wp-block-paragraph">The rescission strips back $810 million in funding for various immigration and refugee programs, foreign debt-relief programs, grants for businesses with minority owners, and several research and education programs. The White House stated that most of the funding was canceled as it was aimed at assisting illegal immigrants or supporting diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives.</p>
<p class="wp-block-paragraph">The White House framed the rescission package as part of Trump’s "commitment to the American taxpayer," emphasizing efforts to cut back on government fraud, waste, and abuse through initiatives like the Department of Government Efficiency and the White House anti-fraud task force. Trump issued the first pocket rescission in five decades in 2025, canceling $4.9 billion in spending on foreign aid.</p>
<p class="wp-block-paragraph">The pocket rescission is a mechanism by which the president requests Congress to rescind funding just before the end of the fiscal year, but Trump’s request does not allow legislators a chance to act before the funds expire.</p>
<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Under normal circumstances, Congress would have 45 days to respond. This pocket rescission comes just five days before the fiscal year 2026 ends on September 30.</p>
<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Many lawmakers, including Senate Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Susan Collins (R-ME), argue that the mechanism is illegal. In a statement on September 25, Collins described the rescission package as an attempt by the Office of Management and Budget to undermine Congress’s Constitutional power of the purse.</p>
<p class="wp-block-paragraph">"The independent Government Accountability Office has concluded that pocket rescissions are unlawful and not permitted by the Impoundment Control Act," Collins stated. "Any effort to rescind appropriated funds without congressional approval is a clear violation of the law. I will work with my colleagues to address these illegal actions."</p>
<p class="wp-block-paragraph">The White House has cited the Impoundment Control Act as its legal justification for the pocket rescissions. In September 2025, the Supreme Court temporarily sided with the Trump administration regarding its use of funding cancellation powers, stating that the government had made a "sufficient showing" to justify its actions under the law.</p>
<p class="wp-block-paragraph">House Budget Committee ranking member Brendan Boyle (D-PA) also issued a statement supporting Collins’s view that the move disregards Congress’s power of the purse, asserting that the rescission was made "illegally."</p>
<p class="wp-block-paragraph">The main cancellation announced on September 25 affects $567 million in funding for the Department of Health and Human Services, which the White House claims "provided services to refugees, asylees, and other non-citizens and put unaccompanied children in harm’s way."</p>
<p class="wp-block-paragraph">The rescissions also canceled appropriated funding for programs in the departments of Homeland Security, Education, Justice, Treasury, and Housing and Urban Development.</p>
<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Congressional fiscal hawks have often supported the use of pocket rescissions as a means to save taxpayer dollars. Senator Rand Paul (R-KY), a prominent fiscal hawk, stated last year that "if we have a way to reduce spending, by all means, we should use it."</p>