Government Shutdowns in the US: History, Causes, Impacts

Introduction: The American Anomaly

The functioning of the modern state is predicated on continuity. In nearly every advanced democracy, the administrative machinery of government—the collection of taxes, the payment of pensions, the patrolling of borders, and the oversight of public health—operates independently of the vagaries of parliamentary debate. If a budget is not passed by the start of a fiscal year in the United Kingdom, Canada, or Germany, automatic mechanisms or established conventions ensure that funding continues at existing levels. The government does not simply "turn off."

The United States, however, stands as a solitary outlier in this regard. In the American political system, the failure to enact appropriations legislation results in a "government shutdown"—a legal and operational cessation of all non-essential federal activities. This phenomenon is not mandated by the Constitution, nor is it an inevitable byproduct of the separation of powers. Rather, it is the result of a specific accumulation of statutory interpretations, legislative reforms, and evolving political norms that have transformed routine budgetary deadlines into existential crises.

The history of the government shutdown is a history of the breakdown of the American legislative process. It traces an arc from the bureaucratic "funding gaps" of the 1970s, which were largely ignored by the public and the agencies themselves, to the weaponized shutdowns of the 1990s and 2010s. This trajectory culminated in the catastrophic events of the mid-2020s: the record-breaking 43-day shutdown of late 2025 and the subsequent, violent standoff involving the Department of Homeland Security in January 2026.

This report offers an exhaustive analysis of this distinctively American pathology. It examines the legal frameworks that make shutdowns possible, specifically the Antideficiency Act and its 1980 reinterpretation by Attorney General Benjamin Civiletti. It surveys the historical evolution of fiscal brinkmanship, analyzing how the shutdown shifted from an administrative nuisance to a tool of partisan leverage. Finally, it provides a detailed, granular accounting of the 2025-2026 crisis, assessing the profound economic, scientific, and sociological scars left by the longest period of government paralysis in the nation's history.

Part I: The US Legal and Structural Architecture Leading to Government Shutdowns

To understand the mechanics of a shutdown, one must first dismantle the legal machinery that triggers it. The shutdown is not a single switch thrown by a President or a Speaker of the House; it is the automatic consequence of a collision between constitutional authority and statutory restriction.

The Constitutional Basis: The Power of the Purse

The foundational constraint is found in Article I, Section 9, Clause 7 of the U.S. Constitution: "No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law." This clause enshrines the legislative branch's supremacy over the executive in matters of finance. It ensures that the President cannot fund armies, bureaucracies, or pet projects without the explicit consent of the people's representatives.

However, the Constitution is silent on the consequences of inaction. It does not specify what should occur if the legislative branch fails to provide those appropriations by a certain date. For the first two centuries of the republic, this silence was interpreted through a lens of practicality. The government was small, and the expectation was that if funding lapsed, it would be restored quickly. Agencies continued to function on a "nod and wink" basis, incurring obligations with the faith that Congress would eventually pay the bill.

The Antideficiency Act: From Fiscal Discipline to Criminal Liability

The statutory root of the modern shutdown lies in the Antideficiency Act (ADA). Originally passed in 1884 and significantly amended in 1950, the ADA was designed to prevent "coercive deficiencies." In the 19th century, agencies would often spend their entire annual budget in the first few months of the year, forcing Congress to appropriate additional funds to avoid the waste of half-finished projects or the political cost of disbanded armies.¹

The ADA prohibited federal employees from entering into contracts or obligations in advance of appropriations. Specifically, it stated that no officer of the government could "involve the Government in any contract or other obligation, for the payment of money for any purpose, in advance of appropriations made for such purpose, unless such contract or obligation is authorized by law".²

For decades, this prohibition was viewed as a check on overspending, not a mandate to close the government. Agency heads assumed that "essential" operations were implicitly "authorized by law" due to their statutory duties to run their departments.

The Civiletti Opinions: The Legal Big Bang

The modern era of the government shutdown began not in Congress, but in the Department of Justice. In 1980, President Jimmy Carter, facing a potential funding gap, asked Attorney General Benjamin Civiletti for a legal opinion on the scope of the ADA. Civiletti’s response changed the course of American governance.

In two opinions issued in 1980 and 1981, Civiletti interpreted the ADA strictly. He argued that if Congress had not appropriated funds, the executive branch had no legal authority to continue operations or to employ the services of its workers. To do so would be to "accept voluntary services," which was also explicitly banned by the ADA (to prevent agencies from accruing moral debts to volunteers that Congress would feel obligated to pay).³

Civiletti famously wrote, "It is my opinion that, during periods of 'lapsed appropriations,' no funds may be expended except as necessary to bring about the orderly termination of an agency's functions".⁵

However, Civiletti recognized that a total cessation of government would be catastrophic. He therefore carved out exceptions based on the premise that the President has a constitutional duty to execute the laws and protect the nation. He ruled that activities involving "the safety of human life or the protection of property" could continue.⁴

This legal interpretation created the bifurcation of the federal workforce that defines modern shutdowns:

1. Excepted (formerly "Essential") Employees: Those whose work protects life or property (e.g., air traffic controllers, FBI agents, border patrol). They must work but cannot be paid until appropriations are enacted.

2. Non-Excepted (Furloughed) Employees: Those whose work does not meet the strict criteria (e.g., national park rangers, grant administrators, museum curators). They are barred from working and sent home without pay.⁶

This legal framework converted a political failure (the lack of a budget) into a legal mandate (the shutdown). It stripped the executive branch of the flexibility to keep the government running during a dispute, thereby raising the stakes of every budgetary deadline.

The 1974 Budget Act and the Creation of the Cliff

While the ADA provided the gun, the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 loaded it. Passed in response to President Nixon's aggressive use of impoundments (refusing to spend money Congress had appropriated), the Act sought to reassert congressional control over the budget.⁷

The Act established the modern budget process:

• It moved the start of the fiscal year from July 1 to October 1, theoretically giving Congress more time to pass bills.

• It created the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to provide independent economic analysis.

• It established the "reconciliation" process, a powerful tool for passing budget-related legislation with a simple majority in the Senate.

Paradoxically, by formalizing the timeline and creating the October 1 deadline, the Act created a clear "cliff" for lawmakers. Before 1974, the process was more fluid. After 1974, the failure to pass the twelve required appropriations bills by September 30 became a visible mark of failure, necessitating a "Continuing Resolution" (CR) to avoid the penalties of the ADA.⁴

Part II: The Evolution of the Shutdown (1976–2018)

The history of shutdowns is not static; it is a history of escalation. What began as a series of administrative hiccups in the late 1970s evolved into a tactic of negotiation in the 1990s, and finally into a weapon of ideological warfare in the 21st century.

The Era of "Funding Gaps" (1976–1980)

In the years immediately following the 1974 Budget Act but prior to the full implementation of the Civiletti opinions, the government experienced a series of "funding gaps." Between 1976 and 1980, there were six such gaps, ranging in duration from 8 to 17 days.¹⁰

During these events, the government did not shut down in the modern sense. Agencies largely continued to operate. The public did not find national parks closed or passport offices shuttered. These gaps were driven by disputes over specific policy riders—most notably abortion funding, which caused repeated stalemates during the Carter administration.⁹ They were viewed as technical failures of the legislative process rather than constitutional crises.

The Transitional Era (1981–1990)

Following Civiletti’s ruling, the 1980s saw a series of short shutdowns under Presidents Reagan and George H.W. Bush. There were nine shutdowns during this period, but most lasted only one to three days, often occurring over weekends to minimize impact.⁹

These were "fake" shutdowns in a sense. The threat was real, but the political will to inflict pain was absent. Congress and the President would typically pass a CR within hours or days. The Civiletti opinion was being tested, but the political cost of a prolonged shutdown was viewed as too high for either side to risk.

The Weaponization Phase: 1995–1996

The fundamental shift occurred in 1995. The Republican Party, having taken control of the House of Representatives for the first time in 40 years under Speaker Newt Gingrich, sought to use the appropriations process to force President Bill Clinton to agree to a balanced budget and cuts to Medicare and public health programs.¹

This led to two major shutdowns:

1. November 13–19, 1995 (5 days): A preliminary skirmish that ended with a temporary CR.

2. December 15, 1995 – January 6, 1996 (21 days): The main event. This shutdown was the longest in history at the time and marked the first time a shutdown was used explicitly as a leverage strategy.

The 1995-1996 shutdown established the "Washington Monument Syndrome"—the idea that the government would close the most visible and popular services (like national monuments) to maximize public pressure on the opposition. It also established the political reality that shutdowns tend to hurt the legislative branch more than the executive; President Clinton successfully framed the Republicans as extremists, aiding his re-election in 1996.

The Ideological Phase: 2013 and the ACA

After a period of relative calm (punctuated by near-misses), the shutdown returned in 2013. This time, the driver was not the party leadership but a faction within the party. Conservative House Republicans, urged on by Senator Ted Cruz, demanded the defunding of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) as a condition for funding the government.

The resulting 16-day shutdown (October 1–17, 2013) was notable for its intensity. It cost the economy an estimated $24 billion and shaved 0.6% off the fourth-quarter GDP.⁶ It demonstrated that a motivated minority within the majority party could force a shutdown even against the wishes of their own leadership (Speaker John Boehner was initially reluctant to pursue the strategy).

The "Partial" Shutdown of 2018–2019

The escalation continued under the Trump administration. The shutdown from December 22, 2018, to January 25, 2019, lasted 35 days, breaking the 1996 record.¹ The cause was President Trump’s demand for $5.7 billion to build a border wall.

This shutdown introduced the concept of the "partial" shutdown. Because Congress had successfully passed five of the twelve appropriations bills (covering Defense, Energy, etc.), about 75% of the government was funded. The shutdown was confined to the remaining agencies, including the State Department, DHS, Justice, and Interior. This blunted the immediate nationwide impact but concentrated the suffering on specific workforces, particularly the TSA and Coast Guard. The shutdown ended only when air traffic delays at LaGuardia Airport, caused by unpaid controllers calling in sick, threatened to cripple the national transportation network.¹²

Part III: The 2025 Shutdown — The 43-Day Siege

If the shutdowns of 1995, 2013, and 2018 were battles, the shutdown of 2025 was a war of attrition. Occurring at the start of President Donald Trump’s second term, it shattered all previous records for duration and exposed the fragility of the American economy to sustained political dysfunction.

The Political Context: The ACA Cliff

The catalyst for the 2025 shutdown was the expiration of expanded subsidies for the Affordable Care Act. These subsidies, which had been temporarily extended in previous years to lower premiums for middle-income Americans, were set to expire in November 2025.

Democrats in the Senate, holding a slim majority, refused to pass any appropriations bill that did not include a permanent extension of these subsidies, arguing that their expiration would trigger a cost-of-living crisis for millions. House Republicans, aligned with the administration's goal of reducing federal spending, sought to decouple the subsidies from the budget, aiming to let them expire or negotiate a significantly reduced package.¹³

The impasse was absolute. On October 1, 2025, funding lapsed for the entire government, triggering a full shutdown.

Timeline of the Crisis

• October 1, 2025: The shutdown begins. National Parks close (or partially close), federal websites go dark, and 900,000 workers are furloughed.¹³

• October 15, 2025: The first pay period is missed. Reports of financial distress among federal workers and contractors begin to dominate the news cycle.

• November 1, 2025: The shutdown surpasses 30 days. Head Start programs begin to close en masse as their annual grants expire.

• November 12, 2025: After 43 days, the longest shutdown in history ends. The resolution is a Continuing Resolution (H.R. 5371) extending funding through January 30, 2026, combined with full-year appropriations for Military Construction and Veterans Affairs.¹³

Economic Impact: The Multiplier Effect

The economic toll of the 2025 shutdown was severe, validating the warnings of economists that the damage of a shutdown is non-linear—it accelerates the longer the shutdown persists.

GDP and Growth

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated that the 43-day shutdown reduced real GDP in the fourth quarter of 2025 by approximately 1.5 percentage points.¹⁵

• Direct Costs: The CBO calculated that lost output from furloughed federal workers amounted to roughly $28 billion during the shutdown period.¹⁶

• Permanent Loss: While some economic activity rebounds when back pay is issued (a "V-shaped" recovery), the CBO estimated that $11 billion to $14 billion in economic activity was permanently lost.¹⁴ This represents missed hotel bookings, cancelled contracts, and lost productivity from private sector firms dependent on federal permits or payments.

The Credit Rating Downgrade

Perhaps the most lasting scar was on the nation's financial reputation. The United States had already lost its "AAA" rating from Standard & Poor's in 2011 and Fitch in 2023.¹⁸ On May 16, 2025, anticipating the fiscal volatility and the looming shutdown, Moody’s Ratings—the last of the "Big Three" to hold the U.S. at its highest tier—downgraded U.S. sovereign debt from Aaa to Aa1.¹⁹ The agency cited "the increase over more than a decade in government debt" and, crucially, the "repeated failure of Congress to agree on measures to reverse the trend," noting that polarization had rendered the budget process unpredictable.²⁰ This downgrade signaled to global markets that U.S. Treasury bonds, once the "risk-free" benchmark of the world economy, were now subject to political risk.

Sector-Specific Impacts

1. The Contractor Crisis: The Silent Victims

While the Government Employee Fair Treatment Act guarantees back pay for direct federal employees, federal contractors enjoy no such protection. The 2025 shutdown devastated this sector.

• Scope: Approximately 1 million contractor employees faced lost paychecks.²¹ These ranged from high-level IT consultants to janitorial staff in federal buildings.

• Small Business Insolvency: Small government contractors, which often operate on thin margins, faced existential liquidity crises. Unable to invoice the government for work performed, and with new task orders frozen, many were forced to lay off staff or close entirely. The Professional Services Council reported that the instability was driving companies to exit the federal market, eroding the industrial base.²²

• Human Toll: In Montgomery County, Maryland, food banks were established specifically for contractors who were ineligible for the unemployment benefits available to laid-off private sector workers and the back pay promised to civil servants.²⁴

2. The Scientific Enterprise: Data Loss and Grant Freezes

The shutdown inflicted deep structural damage on American science, interrupting longitudinal data collection and stalling research.

• The Grant Freeze: The National Institutes of Health (NIH) and National Science Foundation (NSF) ceased processing grants. Nearly $3.8 billion in funding was terminated or frozen.²⁵ At Ohio State University alone, 18 research projects lost nearly $20 million in funding.²⁵

• The Data Purge: Compounding the shutdown was an administrative directive to "realign" federal data. On January 31, 2025 (during the transition period but exacerbated by the later shutdown dynamics), thousands of datasets related to health and demographics were removed from CDC and Census websites.²⁷ The National Climate Assessment was taken offline, and hundreds of scientists were reportedly fired or reassigned.²⁸ This loss of data created "blind spots" for researchers studying public health trends, climate change, and social inequality.

3. National Parks: The "Open but Unstaffed" Disaster

The Department of the Interior attempted to mitigate public backlash by keeping National Parks accessible but unstaffed—a policy first trialed in 2018. The result was widespread ecological damage.

• Joshua Tree National Park: Visitors, unsupervised by rangers, cut down iconic Joshua trees to create illegal roads and campsites. The damage to these slow-growing plants is effectively permanent.¹³

• Big Bend National Park: Prehistoric petroglyphs were vandalized. Without staff to patrol remote areas, cultural artifacts that had survived for centuries were defaced.³⁰

• Sanitation: At Yosemite and Sequoia, the lack of custodial staff led to overflowing restrooms and human waste accumulating near waterways, creating health hazards that eventually forced the parks to close despite the administration's orders.³⁰

• Economic Loss: The National Parks Conservation Association estimated that parks lost $1 million per day in fee revenue, while gateway communities lost up to $80 million per day in visitor spending.³²

4. The Social Safety Net: Head Start

Head Start, which provides early childhood education to low-income families, operates on annual grants. When the shutdown persisted into November, programs with Nov 1 grant renewals received zero funding.

• Closures: By early November, 140 Head Start programs across 41 states were forced to close, leaving 65,000 children without care.³³

• Impact: This created a ripple effect in low-income communities. Parents, unable to afford private childcare, were forced to miss work, exacerbating their financial instability. Even after funding was restored, many programs struggled to reopen as staff had found other employment during the furlough.³⁴

Part IV: The January 2026 Crisis — The Moral Budget

The resolution of the 2025 shutdown on November 12 was a ceasefire, not a peace treaty. The Continuing Resolution (H.R. 5371) funded the government only until January 30, 2026. As this deadline approached, the conflict shifted from a debate over fiscal numbers to a debate over civil rights and police conduct, triggered by a violent event in the Midwest.

The Minneapolis Shootings

In January 2026, the Trump administration launched a "surge" of immigration enforcement operations in sanctuary cities. Minneapolis, Minnesota, became a flashpoint.

• Renee Good: On January 7, 2026, Renee Good, a U.S. citizen, was shot and killed by an ICE agent in Minneapolis.³⁵

• Alex Pretti: On January 24, 2026, federal agents from Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shot and killed Alex Pretti, a 37-year-old intensive care nurse and U.S. citizen, on Nicollet Avenue.³⁶

• The Incident: Official reports claimed Pretti, a licensed gun owner, threatened agents. However, bystander video contradicted this, showing Pretti filming the agents and directing traffic before being swarmed and shot.³⁶

• The Aftermath: It was revealed that agents were not wearing body cameras and were wearing face masks that obscured their identities. An internal DHS report confirmed agents fired multiple times.³⁷

The Legislative Standoff

The killing of Alex Pretti transformed the budget negotiations. Senate Democrats, led by Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, drew a hard line: they would not vote for any Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funding bill that did not include strict statutory reforms.³⁸

The Democrats' demands were specific and non-negotiable:

1. Body Cameras: Mandatory use of body-worn cameras for all ICE and CBP agents.

2. No Masks: A statutory ban on agents wearing face coverings during enforcement operations.

3. Warrants: A requirement for judicial warrants for "roving patrol" stops.³⁸

Republicans, who held the majority in the Senate, argued that the funding bill already included money for cameras and de-escalation training. They accused Democrats of using a tragedy to defund border security and "protect sanctuary city policies".⁴⁰ However, because the Senate operates with a 60-vote filibuster threshold for legislation, Republicans could not pass the DHS appropriation without Democratic votes.

The Looming Partial Shutdown

As of January 28, 2026, the negotiations have collapsed. The House, having passed its version of the bills, is out of session. The Senate is deadlocked.

• The Threat: If no deal is reached by midnight on January 30, a partial shutdown will begin. This shutdown would affect DHS, the State Department, and other agencies not covered by the November "minibus."

• The Stakes: Unlike the general shutdown of 2025, this conflict pits the funding of the national security apparatus directly against demands for civil liberties protections. It represents a new evolution in shutdown politics: the use of the budget cliff to litigate specific police practices and use-of-force policies.⁴¹

Part V: Sociological and Theoretical Analysis

The Normalization of Crisis

The history of shutdowns from 1976 to 2026 reveals a disturbing trend: the normalization of crisis. In the 1980s, a three-day shutdown was a scandal. By 2026, a 43-day shutdown is a "tactic."

This normalization is driven by polarization. As the parties have sorted ideologically, the "regular order" of committee work and compromise has been replaced by centralized negotiation between party leaders. The shutdown is no longer a failure of the process; it is the process. It is the only moment when the minority party (or a faction of the majority) has sufficient leverage to force its priorities onto the agenda.

The Erosion of Public Trust

The cumulative effect of these disruptions is a profound erosion of trust in the federal government.

• Reliability: The private sector can no longer rely on the government as a stable partner. Contracts are risky; data is unreliable; permits are delayed.

• Workforce: The federal government is struggling to recruit the next generation of talent. The perception of federal service has shifted from a stable, patriotic calling to a precarious, politically vulnerable career path. The attrition of senior staff during the 2025 shutdown represents a loss of institutional memory that will take decades to rebuild.¹²

Proposals for Reform

The recurrence of shutdowns has led to calls for structural reform.

• Automatic Continuing Resolutions: Proposals like the End Government Shutdowns Act (H.R. 5542) would automatically trigger a CR at current spending levels if appropriations lapse.⁴³ This would effectively eliminate the shutdown as a possibility.

• Political Obstacles: Despite their logic, these bills rarely pass. The reason is political: the party in power (and the minority seeking leverage) does not want to unilaterally disarm. The threat of a shutdown is a powerful tool; giving it up requires a level of mutual trust that does not currently exist in Washington.

Conclusion

The evolution of the government shutdown in the United States is a case study in institutional decay. A legal interpretation made by an Attorney General in 1980, intended to enforce fiscal discipline, has metastasized into a mechanism for political paralysis.

The events of 2025 and 2026 represent the nadir of this trajectory. The 43-day shutdown of 2025 inflicted billions of dollars in damage, degraded the nation's credit rating, and vandalized its natural heritage. The subsequent crisis of January 2026, born from the violence in Minneapolis, demonstrated that the budget process has become the proxy for the nation's deepest moral and cultural divides.

As long as the Antideficiency Act remains in its current form, and as long as political polarization incentivizes brinkmanship over governance, the United States will remain vulnerable to the paralysis of the purse. The government of the world's largest economy will continue to live on borrowed time, operating in the shadow of the next cliff.

Appendix A: Chronology of Major Funding Gaps and Shutdowns (1976–2026)

Dates	Duration	Administration	Primary Cause / Context	Resolution
Sep 30–Oct 11, 1976	10 Days	Ford	Labor/HEW funding veto.	CR passed.
Sep 30–Oct 13, 1977	12 Days	Carter	Abortion funding dispute.	CR passed.
Oct 31–Nov 9, 1977	8 Days	Carter	Abortion funding dispute.	CR passed.
Nov 30–Dec 9, 1977	8 Days	Carter	Abortion funding dispute.	CR passed.
Sep 30–Oct 18, 1978	18 Days	Carter	Defense bill/Public works veto.	CR passed.
Sep 30–Oct 12, 1979	11 Days	Carter	Congressional pay raise dispute.	CR passed.
Nov 20–23, 1981	2 Days	Reagan	First "Civiletti" Shutdown. Spending cuts.	CR passed.
Sep 30–Oct 2, 1982	1 Day	Reagan	Spending bills delay.	CR passed.
Dec 17–21, 1982	3 Days	Reagan	Public works/Jobs program.	CR passed.
Nov 10–14, 1983	3 Days	Reagan	Education spending/Foreign aid.	CR passed.
Sep 30–Oct 3, 1984	2 Days	Reagan	Crime fighting/Water projects.	CR passed.
Oct 3–5, 1984	1 Day	Reagan	Water projects/Civil rights.	CR passed.
Oct 16–18, 1986	1 Day	Reagan	Labor/welfare disputes.	CR passed.
Dec 18–20, 1987	1 Day	Reagan	Contra aid (Nicaragua).	CR passed.
Oct 5–9, 1990	3 Days	G.H.W. Bush	Deficit reduction package.	CR passed.
Nov 13–19, 1995	5 Days	Clinton	Spending cuts/Medicare premiums.	CR passed.
Dec 15, 1995–Jan 6, 1996	21 Days	Clinton	Balanced budget negotiation.	Budget deal.
Sep 30–Oct 17, 2013	16 Days	Obama	Defunding Affordable Care Act.	CR passed.
Jan 19–22, 2018	3 Days	Trump (1st)	DACA/Immigration.	CR passed.
Dec 21, 2018–Jan 25, 2019	35 Days	Trump (1st)	Border Wall funding.	CR passed.
Oct 1–Nov 12, 2025	43 Days	Trump (2nd)	ACA Subsidies/Spending cuts.	CR passed (H.R. 5371).
Jan 31, 2026–?	Pending	Trump (2nd)	DHS Reforms (Pretti/Good shootings).	Unresolved.

Sources:.¹

Appendix B: Economic Impact Data (2025 Shutdown)

The following table summarizes the CBO's analysis of the 2025 shutdown's economic impact on real GDP.

Metric	4-Week Shutdown Scenario	6-Week Shutdown (Actual)	8-Week Shutdown Scenario
Annualized Real GDP Growth Impact (Q4 2025)	-1.0%	-1.5%	-2.0%
Reduction in Federal Outlays (Billions)	-$33 Billion	-$54 Billion	-$74 Billion
Direct Cost to Economy (Lost Output)	-$18 Billion	-$28 Billion	-$39 Billion
Permanently Lost Economic Activity	~$7 Billion	~$11-14 Billion	~$18 Billion

Source: Congressional Budget Office ¹⁶, Brookings Institution.¹⁴

Works cited

1. Past Government Shutdowns: Key Resources - Congress.gov, accessed January 28, 2026, https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R41759

2. The Antideficiency Act Explained - Bipartisan Policy Center, accessed January 28, 2026, https://bipartisanpolicy.org/explainer/the-antideficiency-act-explained/

3. Page 1 43 U.S. Op. Atty. Gen. 293, 5 U.S. Op. Off. Legal Counsel 1, 1981 WL 30865 (U.S.A.G.) United States Attorney General ***1 - Department of Energy, accessed January 28, 2026, https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2013/10/f3/Shutdown.OLC_.1981.general.pdf

4. A Brief History of U.S. Government Shutdowns - Peterson Foundation, accessed January 28, 2026, https://www.pgpf.org/article/a-brief-history-of-us-government-shutdowns-and-why-other-countries-do-not-have-them/

5. That Time a Lawyer Invented the Government Shutdown, accessed January 28, 2026, https://www.govexec.com/management/2022/10/time-lawyer-invented-government-shutdown/378935/

6. Government shutdowns in the United States - Wikipedia, accessed January 28, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_shutdowns_in_the_United_States

7. The Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act at 50 - Brookings Institution, accessed January 28, 2026, https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/WP93_Joyce.pdf

8. Assessing the 1974 Budget Act at 50: | Arnold Ventures, accessed January 28, 2026, https://assets.arnoldventures.org/uploads/Assessing-the-1974-Budget-Act-at-50.pdf.pdf

9. Everything you need to know about a government shutdown - USAFacts, accessed January 28, 2026, https://usafacts.org/articles/everything-you-need-to-know-about-a-government-shutdown/

10. Federal Funding Gaps: A Brief Overview - Congress.gov, accessed January 28, 2026, https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/RS20348

11. Shutdown of the Federal Government: Causes, Processes, and Effects - Congress.gov, accessed January 28, 2026, https://www.congress.gov/crs_external_products/RL/PDF/RL34680/RL34680.27.pdf

12. The government shutdown is now the longest ever—and the public is paying the price, accessed January 28, 2026, https://ourpublicservice.org/blog/the-government-shutdown-is-now-the-longest-ever-the-public-is-paying-the-price/

13. 2025 United States federal government shutdown - Wikipedia, accessed January 28, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_United_States_federal_government_shutdown

14. Government Shutdowns: Causes and Effects - Brookings Institution, accessed January 28, 2026, https://www.brookings.edu/articles/what-is-a-government-shutdown-and-why-are-we-likely-to-have-another-one/

15. The government shutdown will impact an already-struggling economy, from lost paychecks to canceled flights - PBS, accessed January 28, 2026, https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/the-government-shutdown-will-impact-an-already-struggling-economy-from-lost-paychecks-to-canceled-flights

16. A Quantitative Analysis of the Effects of the Government Shutdown on the Economy Under Three Scenarios, as of October 29, 2025 - Congressional Budget Office, accessed January 28, 2026, https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2025-10/61823-Shutdown.pdf

17. A Quantitative Analysis of the Effects of the Government Shutdown on the Economy Under Three Scenarios, as of October 29, 2025 | Congressional Budget Office, accessed January 28, 2026, https://www.cbo.gov/publication/61823

18. Policy Backgrounder: Fitch Downgrades US Rating Amid Fiscal and Governance Concerns - The Conference Board, accessed January 28, 2026, https://www.conference-board.org/pdfdownload.cfm?masterProductID=48798

19. 2025 United States Sovereign Rating Action - Moody's, accessed January 28, 2026, https://www.moodys.com/web/en/us/about-us/usrating.html

20. Successive US administrations and Congress have failed to agree on measures to reverse the trend of large annual fiscal deficits and growing interest costs. We do not believe that material multi-year reductions in mandatory spending and deficits will result from current fiscal proposals under consideration. Over the next decade, we expect larger deficits as entitlement spending rises while government revenue remains broadly flat. In turn, persistent, large fiscal deficits will drive the government's debt and interest burden higher. The US' fiscal performance is likely to deteriorate relative to its own past and compared to other highly-rated sovereigns. - Moody's Ratings, accessed January 28, 2026, https://ratings.moodys.com/ratings-news/443154

21. Shutdown's ripple effect: Contractors, small businesses face devastating economic hit, accessed January 28, 2026, https://www.govexec.com/workforce/2025/10/shutdowns-ripple-effect-contractors-small-businesses-face-devastating-economic-hit/408601/

22. When a shutdown impacts mission, how does industry hold on when contractors are left unpaid - YouTube, accessed January 28, 2026, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4YkbJbyjzg

23. Shutdown's ripple effect: Contractors, small businesses face devastating economic hit, accessed January 28, 2026, https://www.washingtontechnology.com/companies/2025/10/shutdowns-ripple-effect-contractors-small-businesses-face-devastating-economic-hit/408565/

24. Montgomery County and community partners offer resources to assist residents affected by the federal government shutdown, accessed January 28, 2026, https://www2.montgomerycountymd.gov/mcgportalapps/Press_Detail.aspx?Item_ID=22716&Dept=1

25. The Cost of Cuts: How NIH Funding Cuts Disrupted Ohio State Research - YouTube, accessed January 28, 2026, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f74wu18uuk4

26. See the alarming extent of NIH and NSF funding cuts in 2025 - Science News, accessed January 28, 2026, https://www.sciencenews.org/article/nih-nsf-cuts-2025-data

27. A Look at Federal Health Data Taken Offline - KFF, accessed January 28, 2026, https://www.kff.org/hiv-aids/a-look-at-federal-health-data-taken-offline/

28. 2025 United States government online resource removals - Wikipedia, accessed January 28, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_United_States_government_online_resource_removals

29. National Parks Struggle with Skeleton Staff as Shutdown Persists - Bloomberg Government, accessed January 28, 2026, https://news.bgov.com/bloomberg-government-news/national-parks-struggle-with-skeleton-staff-as-shutdown-persists

30. Parks Group Warns Shutdown Impacts Only the Beginning, Urges Congress to Act Immediately, accessed January 28, 2026, https://www.npca.org/articles/10937-parks-group-warns-shutdown-impacts-only-the-beginning-urges-congress-to-act

31. A surge of visitors to Yosemite overwhelms a skeleton crew: 'This is exactly what we warned about' | US federal government shutdown 2025 | The Guardian, accessed January 28, 2026, https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/oct/16/yosemite-government-shutdown-national-parks

32. What a Federal Government Shutdown Means for National Parks, accessed January 28, 2026, https://www.npca.org/articles/3590-what-a-federal-government-shutdown-means-for-national-parks

33. What a Government Shutdown Means for Early Childhood Programs - NAEYC, accessed January 28, 2026, https://www.naeyc.org/resources/blog/government-shutdown-early-childhood-programs

34. DEEP DIVE: Identifying and Mitigating the Shutdown's Impacts on Head Start, accessed January 28, 2026, https://educationcounsel.com/our_work/publications/2025-federal-executive-actions/deep-dive-identifying-and-mitigating-the-shutdown-s-impacts-on-head-start

35. How ICE and Border Patrol Keep Injuring and Killing People, accessed January 28, 2026, https://www.themarshallproject.org/2026/01/26/ice-minneapolis-shooting-alex-pretti

36. Killing of Alex Pretti - Wikipedia, accessed January 28, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Alex_Pretti

37. 2 federal agents fired their weapons during Alex Pretti shooting, government report to Congress says, accessed January 28, 2026, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/two-federal-agents-fired-their-weapons-during-alex-pretti-shooting-report-congress-says/

38. Senate Democrats demand DHS funding bill include reforms to 'rein in ICE' - The Guardian, accessed January 28, 2026, https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jan/28/democrats-dhs-funding-bill-reform-ice

39. Democrats demand new ICE restrictions as government shutdown looms, accessed January 28, 2026, https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2026/01/28/shutdown-looms-over-ice-funding/

40. Federal government could shut down again this week over Homeland Security and ICE funding dispute, accessed January 28, 2026, https://www.kare11.com/article/news/politics/federal-government-could-shut-down-again-this-week-over-homeland-security-and-ice-funding-dispute/89-9130c88f-9ec5-4898-bc84-c9b2c4681dfc

41. Government Shutdown Risk Grows as Jan. 30 Funding Deadline Nears: What We Know, accessed January 28, 2026, https://www.military.com/daily-news/investigations-and-features/2026/01/28/government-shutdown-risk-grows-funding-deadline-nears-what-we-know.html

42. Congress is preparing for a partial government shutdown. How is it different from the last one?, accessed January 28, 2026, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/senate/4433510/congress-preparing-partial-government-shutdown-how-is-it-different-last-one/

43. H.R.5542 - 119th Congress (2025-2026): End Government Shutdowns Act, accessed January 28, 2026, https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/5542