Spending Money Congress Approved — Week of Apr 28, 2025

This week, several presidential executive orders may direct federal agencies to cut off or redirect funding to certain state and local governments, and to alter the enforcement of certain federal laws—all without going through the congressional process normally required when a president wants to change how appropriated money is spent.

This might matter because Congress's control over federal spending is one of the most important checks on presidential power. The Impoundment Control Act of 1974 exists specifically to prevent presidents from simply refusing to spend money Congress has approved. If the executive branch can bypass this process—whether by defunding cities over policy disagreements or by ordering agencies to stop enforcing laws—it could shift the balance of power away from elected legislators and toward the presidency.

Specifically, an executive order on "sanctuary" jurisdictions creates a system where the Attorney General can designate cities and states for potential loss of federal funding if they don't cooperate with immigration enforcement. The administration says this is necessary to uphold federal law and protect public safety. Another order on civil rights enforcement tells agencies to alter enforcement of parts of major civil rights laws like the Fair Housing Act and Title VII, and to drop ongoing investigations. A third order on law enforcement directs the Attorney General to seek termination of court-supervised agreements that monitor police departments for civil rights violations.

There are reasonable alternative explanations for some of these actions. Presidents have always exercised discretion in how they prioritize enforcement, and conditional federal grants have long come with compliance requirements. These orders may also reflect a policy shift intended to align federal actions with the administration's priorities, which could be seen as within the executive's discretion. It's also possible that courts will block or modify these orders before they take full effect—over 200 federal lawsuits challenging administration actions are already underway, as noted in a Senate floor speech this week. However, the breadth and number of these directives—spanning immigration, civil rights, and policing in a single week—suggest a pattern that goes beyond routine enforcement discretion.

Limitations: This analysis is based on the text of published executive orders and congressional statements. It does not reflect how agencies may ultimately implement these orders, or how ongoing court challenges may alter their effect.