President Donald Trump on Friday moved to cancel $810 million in congressionally approved federal funding, targeting 11 pools of unspent money across seven federal departments and agencies. The move includes funding connected to immigration and refugee services, migrant education, minority-owned businesses and programs addressing racial issues.

The action, described as a “pocket rescission,” represents the second time during Trump’s second term that the administration has used the mechanism. The White House said the funds were being withdrawn because the administration considers the spending unnecessary or harmful.

According to the White House, the largest portion of the rescinded funding involves $567 million previously allocated through the Department of Health and Human Services for programs serving refugees, asylum seekers, unaccompanied minors and other noncitizens. The administration argued that changes at the southern border have reduced the need for some of these funds.

Another $15 million was identified for programs administered through the Department of Homeland Security that provided services such as legal assistance, housing, childcare, transportation, healthcare, schooling and language support to immigrants and other noncitizens. The White House characterized these programs as remnants of policies from the Biden administration.

The administration also targeted approximately $10 million in DHS programs that it said supported organizations providing legal services to immigrants. The White House criticized the grants as helping people navigate the U.S. immigration system.

Education funding is also affected. The White House identified $25 million in Department of Education programs for migrant students among the funds being rescinded. Administration officials criticized some previously funded activities, including programs dealing with LGBTQ issues, mental health and immigration-related concerns.

Another $15 million involves the Department of Justice’s Community Relations Service, an agency historically tasked with helping prevent and resolve racial and ethnic tensions, incidents and civil disturbances. The White House said the agency’s activities had moved into areas involving racial and gender ideology that the administration opposed.

The cuts also extend beyond immigration and race-related programs. The $810 million package includes money connected to minority-business initiatives, housing counseling, international assistance and various research and education programs.

The White House described the action as part of Trump’s broader effort to reduce what it considers wasteful government spending. In its explanation, the administration said Trump was using authorities under the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 to withdraw the funds before they were spent.

The move has also raised questions about the balance of power between the executive and legislative branches because the funds had previously been approved by Congress. Critics have questioned whether the administration can use the rescission mechanism to withhold money that lawmakers have already appropriated.

The timing of the decision is significant because the administration announced the rescissions only days before the end of the fiscal year. Critics questioned whether the White House was using the pocket-rescission mechanism to bypass Congress’s traditional control over federal spending.

The White House, however, maintains that the rescissions are consistent with its effort to eliminate spending it considers unnecessary and to redirect federal resources toward its priorities. The administration has particularly emphasized reduced illegal border crossings as a reason for withdrawing money from programs designed to assist migrants and unaccompanied minors.

The funding decision affects a broad range of federal programs, with the largest share involving services for immigrants and refugees, while other reductions concern education, minority businesses, housing assistance, racial-relations programs and international aid. The administration’s action has simultaneously renewed debate over federal spending priorities and the extent of presidential authority over money appropriated by Congress.