California and six other states sued President Donald Trump and Office of Management and Budget director Russell Vought on Wednesday, alleging the administration unlawfully impounded congressionally appropriated funds. The suit also seeks to block the administration’s proposed rescission of an additional $810 million in federal funds.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta filed the complaint in the Northern District of California, joined by Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico and Oregon. They challenge the president’s authority to unilaterally withhold congressionally appropriated funds and allow them to expire, alleging that the administration failed to spend money it was legally required to obligate and spend.
The states argue that the president has a duty to follow Congress’ spending priorities and cannot rescind funds based on his policy preferences. They allege that impoundments violate the Constitution’s Spending Clause, which grants Congress authority over federal spending, the Presentment Clause, which prescribes the legislative process, and the Take Care Clause, which obligates the president to ensure that the laws “be faithfully executed.” These clauses together preserve the separation of powers by ensuring that Congress decides where tax dollars go.
The states warn that allowing the administration’s actions to stand would “reduce Congress’s statutory appropriations to mere recommendations” and eliminate core policy negotiations between Congress and the executive branch.
Attorney General Bonta criticized President Trump’s “blatant disregard” for the constitutional framework of government, adding that “Just because the President doesn’t like a program doesn’t mean he can defund it.”
The complaint also addresses the president’s proposed rescission of $810 million in federal funding. The administration said the proposal builds its use of “pocket rescissions” through the Impoundment Control Act (ICA) last year, when it also froze nearly $5 billion in foreign aid. The Supreme Court, without reaching the merits, allowed the freeze to continue.
Last year, the administration argued a “pocket rescission” allows a president to propose rescission of funds with fewer than 45 days remaining before expiration and withhold them until they lapse, so that the money goes unspent without congressional action. The Government Accountability Office rejected this view, stating that the ICA “does not allow the President to withhold budget authority through its date of expiration.”
The Trump administration says the rescission is for “harmful government spending.” The proposed cuts mostly targeted programs serving immigrants and noncitizens. More than half of the proposed cuts, approximately $567 million, target the Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Refugee Resettlement.
The administration claimed other cuts were aimed at welfare programs for illegal immigrants, nongovernmental organizations that assist undocumented immigrants, education programs for immigrants, as well as funding linked to LGBT youth programs, race-based grants, and climate-related debt relief and research.