As these cases go before the courts it's important for them to straighten these bunch of cronies out. Failing to do so puts us into a constitutional crises unlike anything we've ever experienced before. This should be an open and shut case. Failure of the courts to impede them will spell the end of the United States as we understood it to be.
A Blog About Anything & Everything.
Monday, March 24, 2025
Trump/Elon Funding Cuts Are So Illegal. Here's Why..
As these cases go before the courts it's important for them to straighten these bunch of cronies out. Failing to do so puts us into a constitutional crises unlike anything we've ever experienced before. This should be an open and shut case. Failure of the courts to impede them will spell the end of the United States as we understood it to be.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Which budget cuts are illegal, specifically, and what are the legal Statute Reference Numbers to help us understand why? Thanks!
ReplyDeleteUnder the U.S. Constitution - Article 1 Clause 9 Congress has further refined various legislation. One of them being "The Congressional Power of the Purse Act ". That can be found HERE
DeleteChairman Yarmuth Seeks White House Commitment to Follow the Law & Refrain from Unlawful Impoundments-
...adhere to the requirements of the Impoundment Control Act of 1974 ... under the law, "apportionment authorities may not be used as a form of executive control or influence over agency functions and may not be used to withhold funds in violation of the ICA. (Impoundment Control Act of 1974 )"
The Impoundment Control Act of 1974 created the procedural means by which the Congress considers and reviews executive branch withholdings of budget authority. It requires the President to report promptly to the Congress all withholdings of budget authority and to abide by the outcome of the congressional impoundment review process.
DeleteIt can be found HERE
According to WIKPEDIA..
DeleteThe power was available to all presidents up to and including Richard Nixon, and was regarded as a power inherent to the office, although one with limits. The Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 was passed in response to high impoundments under President Nixon. The Act removed that power, and Train v. City of New York (whose facts predate the 1974 Act, but which was argued before the U.S. Supreme Court after its passage) closed potential loopholes in the 1974 Act. The president's ability to indefinitely reject congressionally approved spending was thus removed.
The Impoundment Control Act of 1974 provides that the president may propose rescission of specific funds, but that rescission must be approved by both the House of Representatives and Senate within 45 days. In effect, the requirement removed the impoundment power, since Congress is not required to vote on the rescission and, in fact, has ignored the vast majority of presidential requests.
Interesting reading. Thank you for the links,
Delete