U.S. Code » Title 2 » Chapter CHAPTER 17B— IMPOUNDMENT CONTROL › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER II— CONGRESSIONAL CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED RESCISSIONS, RESERVATIONS, AND DEFERRALS OF BUDGET AUTHORITY

2 U.S.C. § 683

Rescission of budget authority

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 2 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) Transmittal of special messageWhenever the President determines that all or part of any budget authority will not be required to carry out the full objectives or scope of programs for which it is provided or that such budget authority should be rescinded for fiscal policy or other reasons (including the termination of authorized projects or activities for which budget authority has been provided), or whenever all or part of budget authority provided for only one fiscal year is to be reserved from obligation for such fiscal year, the President shall transmit to both Houses of Congress a special message specifying—(1) the amount of budget authority which he proposes to be rescinded or which is to be so reserved;(2) any account, department, or establishment of the Government to which such budget authority is available for obligation, and the specific project or governmental functions involved;(3) the reasons why the budget authority should be rescinded or is to be so reserved;(4) to the maximum extent practicable, the estimated fiscal, economic, and budgetary effect of the proposed rescission or of the reservation; and(5) all facts, circumstances, and considerations relating to or bearing upon the proposed rescission or the reservation and the decision to effect the proposed rescission or the reservation, and to the maximum extent practicable, the estimated effect of the proposed rescission or the reservation upon the objects, purposes, and programs for which the budget authority is provided.(b) Requirement to make available for obligation

Any amount of budget authority proposed to be rescinded or that is to be reserved as set forth in such special message shall be made available for obligation unless, within the prescribed 45-day period, the Congress has completed action on a rescission bill rescinding all or part of the amount proposed to be rescinded or that is to be reserved. Funds made available for obligation under this procedure may not be proposed for rescission again.

(Pub. L. 93–344, title X, § 1012, July 12, 1974, 88 Stat. 333; Pub. L. 100–119, title II, § 207, Sept. 29, 1987, 101 Stat. 786.)Editorial NotesCodification

Section was formerly classified to section 1402 of Title 31 prior to the general revision and enactment of Title 31, Money and Finance, by Pub. L. 97–258, § 1, Sept. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 877.

Amendments

1987—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 100–119 inserted at end “Funds made available for obligation under this procedure may not be proposed for rescission again.”

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16 cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1985–2025 · leading case: In Re: Aiken Cnty., 725 F.3d 255 (D.C. Cir. 2013).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In Re: Aiken Cnty., 725 F.3d 255 (D.C. Cir. 2013). · cites it 2× “See 2 U.S.C. § 683 ; see also Train v. City of New York, 420 U.”
Policy & Rsch., LLC v. U.S. Dep't of Health & Human Servs., 313 F. Supp. 3d 62 (D.C. Cir. 2018). “115-31 ; (2) the Impoundment Control Act of 1974, 2 U.S.C. § 683 ; and (3) the Anti-Deficiency Act, 31 U.”
Cnty. of Santa Clara v. Trump, 250 F. Supp. 3d 497 (N.D. Cal. 2017). “To effectuáte this purpose, the Order directs that “the Attorney General and the Secretary, in their discretion and to the extent consistent with law, shall ensure that jurisdictions that willfully refuse to comply with 8 U.”
Elinor R. Bacon v. Dep't of Hous. & Urban Dev., 757 F.2d 265 (Fed. Cir. 1985). · cites it 2× “The Act provides that if the Executive branch determines that all or part of a budget authority is not required, or desires it to be rescinded or deferred for reasons of fiscal policy, the President must submit a special message to Congress proposing rescission or deferral of…”
Cnty. of Santa Clara v. Trump, 275 F. Supp. 3d 1196 (N.D. Cal. 2017). “But that is what Section 9(h) purports to do, to give the Attorney General and the Secretary the power to place a new condition on federal funds (compliánce with Section 1373) not authorized by Congress.”
Byrd v. Raines, 956 F. Supp. 25 (D.D.C. 1997). “2 U.S.C. § 683 (b). The perceived deficiency of the rescission process under the ICA that inspired passage of the Line Item Veto Act was the necessity of congressional acquiescence.”
City of New Haven, Connecticut v. United States, 634 F. Supp. 1449 (D.D.C. 1986). “2 U.S.C. § 683 . To propose a rescission the President must send a special message to Congress detailing the amount of the proposed rescission, the reasons for it, and a summary of the effects the rescission would have on the programs involved.”
City of New Haven v. United States, 809 F.2d 900 (D.C. Cir. 1987). “See 2 U.S.C. § 683 (1982). For temporary impoundments (or “deferrals”), Congress adopted the House approach, which allowed impoundments to become effective without prior approval if neither House of Congress passed a resolution disapproving the impoundment.”
Global Health Council v. Donald J. Trump (D.D.C. 2025). · cites it 4× “135 at 13; see 2 U.S.C. § 683 (a) (providing that the President shall transmit a special message with certain information to both houses of Congress whenever he “determines that all or part of any budget authority will not be 15 required to carry out the full objectives or scope…”
Global Health Council v. Donald J. Trump (D.C. Cir. 2025). · cites it 3× “2 U.S.C. § 683(a). The message must address the (1) amount at issue; (2) department and project or functions involved; (3) reasons 7 for rescission or reservation; (4) fiscal, economic and budgetary effects; and (5) relevant facts, circumstances and considerations as well as…”
Global Health Council v. Donald J. Trump (AMENDED OPINION) (D.C. Cir. 2025). · cites it 3× “2 U.S.C. § 683(a). The message must address the (1) amount at issue; (2) department and project or functions involved; (3) reasons for rescission or reservation; (4) fiscal, economic and 7 budgetary effects; and (5) relevant facts, circumstances and considerations as well as…”
Global Health Council v. Donald J. Trump (D.D.C. 2025). · cites it 3× “2 U.S.C. § 683 (b) (emphasis added). Defendants’ theory requires overlooking the word “unless” to change the meaning of this provision.”
Show all 16 citing cases →
— 2 U.S.C. § 683(a) — 2 cases
Global Health Council v. Donald J. Trump (D.C. Cir. 2025). “2 U.S.C. § 683(a). The message must address the (1) amount at issue; (2) department and project or functions involved; (3) reasons 7 for rescission or reservation; (4) fiscal, economic and budgetary effects; and (5) relevant facts, circumstances and considerations as well as…”
Global Health Council v. Donald J. Trump (AMENDED OPINION) (D.C. Cir. 2025). “2 U.S.C. § 683(a). The message must address the (1) amount at issue; (2) department and project or functions involved; (3) reasons for rescission or reservation; (4) fiscal, economic and 7 budgetary effects; and (5) relevant facts, circumstances and considerations as well as…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.