President Donald Trump has told House Speaker Mike Johnson he will not spend $4.9 billion in congressionally approved foreign aid, invoking a little-used budgetary maneuver that hasn’t been deployed in nearly half a century.In a letter sent Thursday to Johnson, R-La., and later posted on the White House Office of Management and Budget’s X account, Trump announced he was using a “pocket rescission” – a tactic that allows the president to let funding quietly lapse at the end of the fiscal year. Because Congress has just 45 days to act on such a request, submitting it in late August effectively ensures the money goes unspent when the fiscal year closes on September 30.The last time a president used the tool was in 1977, under Jimmy Carter. Trump’s decision marks a significant escalation in his efforts to cut foreign aid, raising fresh questions about the balance of power between the executive branch and Congress when it comes to federal spending.Target: State department and USAIDThe $4.9 billion in frozen funding was earmarked for the State Department and the US Agency for International Development (USAID), both of which have been frequent targets of Trump’s budget cuts. USAID itself has already been dismantled under his administration, with its remaining programs folded into the State Department.Earlier this year, Trump announced plans to eliminate nearly all foreign assistance contracts, a move that critics warned could devastate global food and health programs. His administration is also appealing to the Supreme Court to halt lower court rulings that preserved foreign aid for global health, including HIV and AIDS programs.A clash with CongressUnder the 1974 Impoundment Control Act, presidents may propose rescinding funds, but lawmakers ultimately decide whether the money is clawed back. By timing his request so late in the fiscal calendar, Trump has ensured lawmakers can’t act before the funds expire — a maneuver that could, if repeated, shift significant spending power away from Congress.Congress did approve Trump’s earlier rescission request in July, cutting $9 billion in foreign aid and public broadcasting funds. But his latest move sidesteps congressional approval entirely.What it meansSupporters say the maneuver is legal and long overdue, while critics argue it undermines congressional authority and risks U.S. credibility abroad. With billions in aid for health, food, and development now in limbo, foreign governments and relief agencies are bracing for ripple effects.