FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Wednesday, January 22, 2025
PRESS CONTACT:
maddy@focalpointstrategygroup.com
STATEMENT: Russell Vought’s Plan to Wrest Power from Congress is Unpopular and Unconstitutional
After Day One impoundment executive orders and ahead of Second Hearing, CIP Checks and Balances War Room Warns of Vought’s Unconstitutional Violation of Congressional Power
Washington, D.C. – Today, Wednesday, January 22nd, Trump’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB) director nominee Russell Vought will testify again before the Senate Budget Committee. Within moments of taking the Oath of Office, President Trump unleashed Vought’s unconstitutional and unprecedented plan to illegally impound funds already obligated by the federal government. In other words, the federal government has promised funding to specific grantees and, now, the Trump Administration is cancelling the check.
By issuing an illegal deferral of funding from the Inflation Reduction Act and Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the Trump Administration is illegally withholding money for clean energy manufacturing jobs, state highway projects and other key domestic economic priorities.
Ahead of Vought’s second hearing, Congressional Integrity Project Senior Advisor Kyle Herrig issued the following statement on behalf of the Checks and Balances War Room:
“Russell Vought made it unequivocally clear in his first confirmation hearing that he plans to disregard the Constitution in order to advance President Trump’s agenda. If confirmed, Vought—empowered by Trump—will continue to erode our system of checks and balances, subvert American taxpayer dollars, and unconstitutionally bypass Congress to advance Trump’s unpopular agenda. Vought is unqualified to lead the OMB, and the Senate Committee must hold him accountable at tomorrow’s hearing and ensure that, if confirmed, he will uphold the law and preserve the integrity of the Office of Management and Budget.”
At his confirmation hearing, OMB Director nominee Russell Vought must answer whether the Administration intends to follow the law of the Impoundment Control Act or if they will disregard the Supreme Court’s long-standing precedent that impoundment is unconstitutional. Senators should expect answers to the following questions:
- Will the Trump Administration fully comply with all aspects of the Impoundment Control Act’s requirements and send a special message to Congress regarding its impoundment actions?
- Does Vought acknowledge an obligation of funding creates a legal liability to the federal government to deliver that funding to the promised entity? Or does he believe the President can simply ignore contracts and other legal obligations the government enters into?
- Under Vought’s interpretation, what limits exist on presidential impoundment authority? Vought believes the Impoundment Control Act is unconstitutional – does he believe Congress should play any role in executive spending decisions? Does he believe there are any constraints to impounding funding, including for social safety net programs such as Medicare and Social Security?
Impoundment occurs when the president declines to spend money Congress has appropriated and enacted into law. This practice has always been unconstitutional, supported by the 1974 Impoundment Control Act. During the 2024 presidential campaign, Trump has made the power of impoundment a priority in his agenda. New polling from the Wall Street Journal shared that an overwhelming majority of voters are opposed to impoundments.