Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Fact check: What is the role of the President in a government shutdown, particularly in 2025?
Executive Summary
The President in the 2025 shutdown plays a visible operational and political role: the administration can direct certain payments and agency actions during a lapse in appropriations, while using the funding impasse as leverage in negotiations and to reshape federal priorities. Reporting shows the Biden-era/Trump-era (sources reference President Donald Trump in October 2025) administration both arranging critical pay flows—troops and law enforcement continue to be paid—and publicly framing the shutdown as a tool to force budget changes and punish political opponents, even as Congress retains the constitutional power to pass funding and end the lapse [1] [2] [3].
1. The President’s Practical levers: who gets paid and who waits in line
News coverage documents that the administration can identify and authorize limited funding actions during a shutdown, notably ensuring military and many law enforcement pay continues while nonessential federal employees are furloughed or laid off. Reporters describe the White House as having “identified funds” to keep troops paid and as preparing to “ride out” the shutdown by proceeding with layoffs while maintaining critical pay streams, signaling executive control over day-to-day implementation of funding gaps even without new appropriations [1]. This operational authority is not limitless: the accounts emphasize selective continuation of payments rather than a sweeping power to fund all priorities, and they portray the administration’s actions as choices about which programs to sustain during the lapse [1] [3].
2. Political strategy: weaponizing the shutdown to reshape priorities
Multiple outlets characterize the President’s stance as intentionally political: the shutdown is described as a way to exercise new command over federal priorities, using the lapse to press for cuts, reconfigure budgets toward the administration’s agenda, and punish opposition lawmakers. Reporters recount an explicit strategy of publicizing Democrat-backed programs targeted for cuts during the shutdown and framing the funding lapse as leverage to force congressional concessions, a posture presented as a continuation of long-standing tactics but intensified in 2025 [2]. Coverage emphasizes that this is not merely administrative triage but a deliberate political deployment of the shutdown as an instrument of executive pressure [4].
3. How Congress and other actors respond: pressure and consequences
The reporting shows intense pressure on Congress to act, with union leaders and congressional Democrats demanding a clean continuing resolution and warning of humanitarian impacts such as lost SNAP benefits. Senate floor battles and huddles among GOP senators reflect the constitutional reality that Congress must enact appropriations to fully reopen government, while the administration’s selective funding choices shape the practical consequences on the ground. Observers report that Senate votes to reopen government were ongoing and that leaders from both parties publicly debated the administration’s decisions not to fund certain programs in November, casting those choices as politically consequential and administratively disruptive [3] [5].
4. Competing narratives and possible agendas behind coverage
Coverage diverges between framing the shutdown as administrative necessity versus political maneuver. One strand depicts the White House merely managing unavoidable logistics—paying troops and law enforcement while pausing others—whereas another frames the same actions as a tactical move to centralize power and reconfigure federal priorities under the President’s agenda. These contrasting narratives map onto partisan and institutional vantage points: critics warn the shutdown is being used to punish Democrats and alter budgets, while administration statements emphasize operational continuity and fiscal choices. Readers should note that characterization of intent varies across pieces even when reported factual steps—payments and layoffs—are consistent [1] [2].
5. Timeline and what the facts converge on as of late October 2025
Across reports dated October 14 through October 28, 2025, facts converge on several points: the administration declared plans to continue essential payments including military pay, anticipated layoffs of nonessential staff, publicly outlined programs targeted for cuts, and engaged in high-level political coordination with congressional Republicans as votes to reopen government played out in the Senate. Reporting from mid- to late-October shows an escalating political standoff with active negotiations and public pressure from unions and Democrats demanding a clean funding bill. The shared reporting paints a picture of the President exercising selective administrative authority while Congress remains the decisive actor for full funding restoration [1] [2] [4] [3] [5].