Collins weighs pocket-rescission ban; no bill filed yet
Sen. Susan Collins said Senate appropriators are exploring a ban on pocket rescissions after Trump clawed back about $810 million without consulting Congress. Sen. Jeff Merkley’s earlier ban bill was blocked. Collins called that delay an unreported impoundment, and multi-state suits keep the legality fight in court.
Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine) told reporters she wants to curb pocket rescissions in the next spending bill after President Donald Trump canceled roughly $810 million in congressionally approved funds, the Washington Examiner reported. Collins said the Office of Management and Budget acted “without warning or consultation” and called the delay itself an unreported impoundment. Sen. Lisa Murkowski called the tactic “sneaky.” Sen. John Cornyn said he does not believe the president has authority to rescind the money that way; Sen. James Lankford declined to call it unlawful.
Democrats’ earlier attempt to ban pocket rescissions in an August funding patch was blocked by Republicans. Sen. Jeff Merkley’s separate bill to eliminate the maneuver also stalled, per his office. The Hill has catalogued GOP splits: some House appropriators cheered cuts to DEI and noncitizen programs, while Senate appropriators warn about the power of the purse. Majority Leader John Thune said courts will probably decide legality. Multi-state and advocacy lawsuits challenging the clawback remain in process; no overnight nationwide TRO or White House withdrawal landed.
For grant recipients and housing-counseling providers named in the package, the stake is whether appropriated dollars survive into the fiscal year. Watch whether Collins language attaches to year-end appropriations, how Merkley allies regroup, and early court rulings on Impoundment Control Act claims.
Pocket rescissions work by notifying Congress near fiscal-year end so funds expire before lawmakers finish the usual 45-day review. Trump’s latest package hit programs for noncitizens, DEI, education, health research, and housing counseling, Examiner coverage shows. Appropriators say any ban language must clear a 60-vote Senate and could prove tricky if it also tries to restore canceled dollars.
What we know:
Collins is exploring ban language; Merkley’s bill was blocked; about $810 million was clawed back; suits continue without a broader freeze overnight.
What we don’t:
The exact text of any Collins amendment, or whether it can clear a 60-vote Senate.
Where outlets agree The Washington Examiner and The Hill agree Collins is exploring pocket-rescission limits and that no ban bill has become law yet.
Where they differ Merkley and Collins frame the clawback as illegal; the White House and some House Republicans cast it as cutting programs they oppose.