(Pat Nabong/Sun-Times)
Rep. Lauren Underwood (D-IL) issued a forceful rebuke to Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem during a House Appropriations Committee hearing on Tuesday, accusing the administration of bypassing congressional authority by withholding federal grant money.
“Let’s start with Article 1 [of the Constitution], which gives Congress and only Congress the power of the purse,” Underwood stated in her opening remarks. “But this administration is freezing, terminating, and even clawing back federal grants and awards that were already signed into law.”
At the heart of the exchange was whether the executive branch has the legal authority to halt or redirect funds that have already been approved by Congress. Underwood posed a direct question to Secretary Noem: “So, Secretary, let me ask you, do you believe the administration has the authority to subvert appropriations law to freeze and terminate congressional funding?”
Noem responded by defending the administration’s actions. “The administration and the Department of Homeland Security used our authorities that we have to evaluate every grant that was in front of us and made statutory requirements, but also to make sure that they were being spent appropriately,” she said. “So, of course, the president is within his authority.”
Underwood quickly cut in: “Ma’am, this is my time. Thank you so much. What I’m asking is whether you believe that you have the authority to ignore appropriations law.” Noem maintained her position, saying, “We have evaluated grants to make sure if they’re being spent appropriately, and work that is underway and was authorized has continued.”
Unsatisfied with the response, Underwood broadened her argument. “I’m talking broadly, ma’am, and Article 2 does not give the executive the authority to withhold funds, period, and multiple courts have weighed in to agree. Multiple courts have ruled in agreement. Congress controls the power of the purse.”
She ended her remarks with a pointed reminder: “That is a fact that’s not a question. That is a fact, and so if the president disagrees with certain spending, Congress passed the Impoundment Act to create a legal process to seek rescissions, and we expect him to follow the law.”
The tense exchange highlights growing concern among lawmakers over executive overreach and the sanctity of Congress’s constitutional role in federal spending.
READ NEXT
- “I Always Thought I Knew the Symptoms”: Mother Shares Devastating Loss of ‘Fit and Healthy’ Husband, 46, to Hidden Heart Disease
- “It Sounds Like the Judge Isn’t Buying It”: Trump Administration’s Latest Move in Harvard Case Falls Flat
- “We Came and Performed When the Show Asked Us To”: Blake Shelton Responds to AMAs Backlash
- More Than Oranges: The Surprising Foods That ‘Outshine’ Citrus in Vitamin C
- “I Compare It to King Henry VIII”: Laurence Tribe Slams Trump’s Legal Overreach Against Harvard
