Appropriations Law and the Statutory Foreign Affairs Presidency

Appropriations Law and the Statutory Foreign Affairs Presidency

Congress’s authority over the purse is among its most potent powers.
James Madison argued that it was “the most complete and effectual weapon
with which any constitution can arm the immediate representatives of the
people, for obtaining a redress of every grievance, and for carrying into effect every just and salutary measure.” Its political salience continues today;
debates over appropriations defined the first year of the 118th Congress,
leaving the House Speaker’s chair vacant for the longest stretch of time in
over sixty years. It is unsurprising, then, that the executive branch has been
clear about the importance of appropriations in the national security context.

Yet appropriations law remains distressingly underappreciated and, at
times, outright misunderstood. A Department of Defense (“DOD”) news
bulletin, for example, confused the National Defense Authorization Act with
the DOD Appropriations Act. The former had recently been enacted and
provides positive legal authority for DOD activities, while the latter was (at
the time) not yet enacted but now provides the funds necessary to finance
DOD activities. Furthermore, the last substantial academic work on
appropriations and national security law is nearly three decades old.

#