Sen. Susan Collins, the Maine Republican who chairs the Senate Appropriations Committee, says the Trump administration's latest $810 million spending cancellation breaks the law. About $600 million of the package comes from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), including refugee assistance, federal patient safety research, and the Office of Minority Health.
The White House sent the rescission package to House Speaker Mike Johnson on Sept. 25, five days before the fiscal year ends on Sept. 30. The tactic is known as a "pocket rescission" because the money can expire before Congress has time to vote on the request. For health programs, the dispute is about more than procedure. It will help decide whether money Congress already approved reaches refugees, researchers, and community groups.
Health Programs on the Cancellation List
The largest item is $567.4 million from HHS's Refugee and Entrant Assistance account, which funds the Office of Refugee Resettlement. The White House letter says the account is "overfunded due to the Administration's successful border policies" and argues the rescission would end "the use of Federal taxpayer dollars to support non-citizens."
The package also cancels $27.7 million from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), which studies patient safety and health care quality. The administration argues that much of AHRQ's research is "wasteful or duplicative of research conducted elsewhere," including at the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Another $5.1 million would come from the Office of Minority Health, which the letter says "targets funding via grants to specific race and sex-based groups in violation of the President's anti-DEI executive orders."
The rest of the $810 million comes from programs at the departments of Commerce, Education, Homeland Security, Housing and Urban Development, and Justice, plus an international debt restructuring account. The package does not directly cut the budgets of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention or NIH.
Collins Joins Democrats in Objecting
Collins, in a post on X, wrote, "Without warning or consultation, Congress just received an $810 million package of pocket rescissions from the Administration." She called it the latest attempt by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) "to undermine Congress's Constitutional power of the purse."
She said OMB "intentionally withheld these funds for months to execute this unlawful cancellation of appropriations that were approved on a bipartisan basis and signed into law," according to CBS News. She also said, as reported by the Bangor Daily News, "OMB is an agency of the executive branch. It does not get to decide which programs are worth funding."
Sen. Patty Murray of Washington, the committee's vice chair and top Democrat, called the move "theft from the American people, plain and simple."
The White House defended the cuts. In a statement announcing the package, it said, "President Trump is committed to utilizing all possible tools to cut wasteful and harmful government spending that does not benefit American citizens," and cited the president's authority under the Impoundment Control Act. This is the administration's second pocket rescission; the first, in 2025, targeted nearly $5 billion in foreign aid.
The Legal Fight Over Pocket Rescissions
Under the 1974 Impoundment Control Act, a president may ask Congress to cancel funds and may withhold them for up to 45 days of congressional session while lawmakers decide. A pocket rescission sends that request near the end of the fiscal year, so the money can expire before the review period ends, whether or not Congress acts.
The Government Accountability Office (GAO), Congress's nonpartisan watchdog, rejects the tactic. A 2025 GAO explainer on pocket rescissions answers the question of legality directly: "No. A pocket rescission is illegal." A 2018 GAO decision held that "amounts proposed for rescission must be made available for prudent obligation before the amounts expire."
OMB reads the law differently. It argues that the act sets no limit on how late in the fiscal year a president may propose a rescission and withhold the funds while Congress considers it, and it has cited actions by earlier administrations as precedent. In September 2025, the Supreme Court let the administration withhold about $4 billion in foreign aid covered by the first pocket rescission, pausing a lower court order that required the money to be spent. The justices wrote that "this order should not be read as a final determination on the merits," leaving the core legal question open.
What Happens Next
The timing leaves Congress little room. The House is out of session until November, and the fiscal year ends Sept. 30, so the funds would expire before the House returns. Collins said, "I will work with my colleagues to address these illegal actions," but did not describe a specific plan.
The programs at stake serve refugees and other newcomers who receive resettlement support, community organizations that rely on minority health grants, and researchers whose AHRQ work informs patient safety practices. People who use these services can ask their resettlement agency or provider whether any funding change affects them, and grant recipients should watch for official HHS notices.
Key Questions Answered
What is a pocket rescission? It is a request to cancel funds sent so close to the end of the fiscal year that the money can expire before Congress acts on it.
How much HHS money is affected? About $600 million of the $810 million package: $567.4 million in refugee assistance, $27.7 million from AHRQ, and $5.1 million from the Office of Minority Health.
Why does Collins object? She says OMB withheld funding that Congress approved on a bipartisan basis and that the executive branch cannot decide on its own which programs deserve money.
How does the White House justify it? It says the cuts target wasteful and harmful spending and that the Impoundment Control Act gives the president this authority.
Is the move legal? GAO says pocket rescissions are illegal, while OMB says the law allows them. In 2025, the Supreme Court let an earlier pocket rescission take effect but did not rule on the merits.
Are CDC or NIH budgets cut? No. The package does not directly cancel CDC or NIH funding.
Published by Medicaldaily.com
