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.
What happens if a President vetoes a continuing resolution and Congress does not override it?
Executive Summary
If the President vetoes a continuing resolution (CR) and Congress does not override that veto, the vetoed CR does not become law and the result is a lapse in appropriations that typically triggers a federal government shutdown until new funding is enacted. The Constitution gives the President veto power and Congress the ability to override with a two‑thirds vote in both chambers, but that supermajority is difficult to achieve in practice; absent an override, agencies must follow the Antideficiency Act and curtail non‑essential operations [1] [2] [3]. Recent 2025 events illustrate these mechanics: a veto or failure to pass a CR has directly contributed to a shutdown that furloughed hundreds of thousands of employees and disrupted many services [4] [5].
1. How the veto math ends a bill and starts a crisis
When the President returns a vetoed continuing resolution, the Constitutionally prescribed remedy is Congressional reconsideration and an attempted override; an override requires a two‑thirds majority in both the House and the Senate, otherwise the vetoed measure is dead and no funding authority follows from it [1] [6]. The CR is a temporary funding instrument used when regular appropriations are not enacted; if the CR fails to become law and no alternative appropriation or CR exists, federal agencies lose the legal authority to obligate funds beyond the date appropriations expired. This is not a policy choice by agencies but a statutory limitation imposed by the Antideficiency Act, and it is the statutory mechanics — not merely politics — that transforms a failed CR into an operational shutdown [2] [6].
2. The Antideficiency Act: the legal trigger for a shutdown
Absent appropriations language, the Antideficiency Act forbids federal agencies from continuing expenditures for non‑excepted activities, creating an immediate requirement to furlough many workers and suspend non‑essential services while leaving essential national security and public‑safety functions operating. This legal framework is what enforcement agencies use to decide who stays on the job and who is sent home; it is not discretionary once appropriations lapse. Historical and contemporary examples show that once a veto stands and funding lapses, agencies move quickly to implement furloughs and service suspensions, producing real impacts on employees, contractors, and service recipients until Congress or the President enacts new funding [2] [5].
3. Overrides are rare; politics usually decides the outcome
Overriding a presidential veto requires a supermajority that is rare and difficult in a polarized Congress, so the practical expectation when a President vetoes a CR is that the veto will stand unless there is bipartisan momentum strong enough to reach two‑thirds in both chambers. Analysts emphasize that in contemporary politics the two‑thirds threshold often makes an override an improbable remedy for a vetoed funding measure; instead, political negotiation, compromise CRs, or piecemeal appropriations typically follow. Recent 2025 dynamics underscored this reality: efforts to pass stopgap funding faced steep partisan hurdles, and the lack of an override contributed to a prolonged stalemate [3] [6] [4].
4. Real‑world effects: what a shutdown looks like on the ground
When a CR is vetoed and no override follows, the resulting shutdown creates immediate operational disruptions: federal employees are furloughed or required to work without pay in mission‑critical roles, national parks and administrative services close or scale back, and delays occur in regulatory and grant activities. The 2025 shutdown beginning October 1 provides a concrete example: roughly 900,000 employees were affected, illustrating that the legal failure to enact a CR produces tangible impacts on payroll, services, and public access to federal functions until funding is restored [4] [5].
5. How the stalemate usually ends — or doesn’t
A CR veto that is not overridden generally ends when Congress and the President reach a new legislative compromise: passage of a modified CR, passage of full appropriations, or temporary measures accepted by both branches. Media and policy reporting on recent 2025 negotiations show that deals to end shutdowns often involve concessions and staged funding timetables, and even when negotiators announce a framework, passage through both chambers remains necessary to lift the operational constraints. Political incentives — public pressure, economic concerns, national security priorities — drive the timing and content of the eventual agreement that reestablishes legal funding authority [7] [3].
6. Bottom line: a veto without an override means a lapse until Congress acts
Constitutionally and practically, a presidential veto of a continuing resolution that is not overridden leaves the government without the CR’s funding authority and triggers the statutory rules that force a shutdown of non‑essential operations; only new legislation or a successful override ends that lapse. The technical pathway is clear: override with two‑thirds in both chambers or passage of new appropriations/CR accepted by the President. Recent 2025 events confirm this process in action and underline the political difficulty of achieving an override, making negotiation and subsequent legislation the typical route out of any funding lapse [1] [2] [4].