Lawfare Daily: The Impoundment Crisis, One Month In

In the first weeks of the second Trump administration, the Office of Management and Budget abruptly froze trillions of dollars in federal funds—sparking a crisis over impoundment, the executive branch’s assertion of authority to refuse to distribute money appropriated by Congress. Since then, the administration has attempted to withhold further funds disbursed by specific agencies and attempted to dismantle some agencies altogether. Many of these efforts have been blocked by courts. But Congress—the branch of government whose constitutional authority is being usurped—has remained strikingly quiet.

To discuss the state of play on impoundment, Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic caught up with Eloise Pasachoff, a professor at the Georgetown University Law Center, and Brookings Senior Fellow and Lawfare Senior Editor Molly Reynolds. They talked about how things have developed since January, how the courts and Congress are handling the crisis, and how it might shape congressional negotiations to avoid a government shutdown as soon as March 15.

Note: This podcast was recorded on March 4, before the Supreme Court’s March 5 ruling denying the Trump administration’s request to continue a freeze on billions of dollars in foreign aid and sending the case back down to the district court for further litigation.

[Gravel-lv]

Have to love clear headed highly professional intellectual people. Thank you for being you and being here at the end of days.

[FullFrameAlchemy]

Very interesting. This is only the second YouTube channel I have seen to discuss the specific issue of impoundments head on. It is a fine line between Congressional appropriation and Executive administration of spending. While we wait for month two to bear out, I would appreciate if this same quorum could address the [14th Amendment] EO (# 14160) and [one of] the resultant cases underway (currently at the TRO stage), Washington v Trump, C25-0127-JCC. Would appreciate an analysis of the cited cases under the "Conclusion of Law, " §3 n.6 and how they may or may not control the overall determination of legality of the EO. Also, how 8 U.S. Code § 1401 would apply. Thanks for a great episode.

[mcosu]

Is the government actually paying out funds from existing NIH or NSF grants? I know that they were ordered to unfreeze the funds by judges, but have they?

[BKMiller]

You do know that they don't care what the courts say, right?

[Ingraomusic]

49:18 All that done within 30 days with the severely reduced staff? This is a P2025 planned forced failure to justify their choice of what is "worthy "

[seamonkey]

How is the moral high ground with no YouTube
right that are really disgusted……..

[kevinlewis]

Therecis no such thing as a constitutional right or a civil rights to be honest !

[denniskight]

The constitutional argument is how much control can congress have over the executive and whether or not a district court can order a TRO that does not just pause but cause an action? If you do not cover the Presidents argument and possible overreach of district judges you do disservice to listeners.

[Starfish]

Are these women triplets? Lol same glasses.

[motionthings]

Babies are literally dying. But I wrote this very angry article about it

[mikebaker]

This podcast is hard to listen to. The "um", "uh", and statements that end with a rising inflection need to be cut down dramatically.

I quit the broadcast very early on because I couldn't follow what was being communicated. This is probably an important topic, but the listening experience was just too unpleasant for me. 😔