Palabras clave
cláusula de apropiaciones presupuestales
ciclo de apropiaciones
separación de poderes
doctrina Chevron
Cómo citar
Resumen
Este documento explora la Cláusula de Apropiaciones Presupuestales dentro del diseño constitucional estadounidense, subrayando su importancia para restringir y asignar eficientemente el poder público. Para esto, analiza las disputas políticas que han involucrado a las presidencias de Obama y Trump con el Congreso, desplegando también esfuerzos conjuntos entre poderes públicos, como la aprobación del Plan Colombia. Un contenido sustancial se centra en establecer cómo funciona el ciclo de apropiaciones presupuestales, junto con cómo enfoques jurídicos como la Doctrina Chevron arrojan luz sobre el rol del poder judicial en la solución de disputas entre el Congreso y el Ejecutivo por el control del poder del erario.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Amendment to rules comm. Print 117–13 offered by ms. Ocasio-Cortez of New York, § SEC. 13ll. Report on Human Rights in Colombia. (n.d.). https://amendments-rules.house.gov/amendments/OCASNY_081_xml210914131709873.pdf
Amy Belasco, “Cost of Iraq, Afghanistan, and other global war on terror operations since 9/11”, Congressional Research Service (2014).
Anna Cederstav, “Scientists Challenge Claims of US State Department that Aerial Eradication in Colombia is Safe for Humans and the Environment”. Earthjustice, Sep. 30, 2002. https://earthjustice.org/press/2002/scientists-challenge-claims-of-us-state-department-that-aerial-eradication-in-colombia-is-safe-for-humans-and-th
Arnold Kanter, “Congress and the defense budget: 1960-1970,” 66, No. 1 American Political Science Review 129-43 (1972).
Barry M. Blechman & W. Philip Ellis, The politics of national security: Congress and US defense policy (Oxford University Press, 1992).
Bill Heniff Jr., Megan S Lynch & James V. Saturno, “The Congressional Appropriations Process: An Introduction” (2016).
Bruce Ackerman & Oona Hathaway, “Limited war and the constitution: Iraq and the crisis of presidential legality”, 109 No. 4 Michigan Law Review 447-517 (2011). http://www.jstor.org/stable/25801844
California v. Trump, 963 F.3d 926 (9th Cir. 2020) (n/d).
Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837, 104 S. Ct. 2778, 81 L. Ed. 2d 694 (U.S. Supreme Court 25 June 1984).
“Colombia: Potential cocaine production increased by 53 per cent in 2023, according to new UNODC survey”. Office on Drugs and Crime of the United Nations, Oct. 18, 2024. https://www.unodc.org/unodc/press/releases/2024/October/colombia_-potential-cocaine-production-increased-by-53-per-cent-in-2023--according-to-new-unodc-survey.html
Connie Veillette, “Plan Colombia: a Progress Report”, CRS Report for Congress (2005).
Connie Veillette & Carolina Navarrete-Frías, Drug crop eradication and alternative development in the Andes (2005).
Daniel Mejía, Evaluación económica del Plan Colombia (2009).
Daryl J. Levinson, “Looking for power in public law”, 130 Harv. L. Rev. 31 (2016).
Don Lindholm, Aaron Wildavsky, ed., 10, No. 1 Administrative Science Quarterly 139-41 (1965). https://doi.org/10.2307/2391658
Donald F. Kettl, Deficit Politics: Public Budgeting in Its Institutional and Historical Context, New topics in politics (Macmillan, 1992).
D. Roderick Kiewiet & Mathew D. McCubbins, “Presidential influence on congressional appropriations decisions”, American Journal of Political Science 713-36 (1988).
Elizabeth Garrett, “Legislating Chevron,” 101, No. 8 Michigan Law Review 2637-76 (2003).
Elizabeth Garrett, “Rethinking the structures of decisionmaking in the Federal Budget Process”, 35 Harv. J. on Legis 387 (1998).
Elizabeth Rybicki, Conference committee and related procedures: An introduction, Congressional Research Service (2015).
Ernesto Londoño, “U.S. Military Starts Flying Aid for Venezuela to Colombia”, The New York Times (Febreuary 16, 2019, sec. Americas). https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/16/world/americas/venezuela-aid-us-air-force.html
Ex parte Endo, 323 U.S. 283, 65 S. Ct. 208, 89 L. Ed. 243 (U.S. Supreme Court 18 December 1944).
Forrest Hylton, “Plan Colombia: The measure of success”, 17 Brown J. World Aff. 99 (2010).
Gillian E. Metzger, “Taking Appropriations Seriously”, Columbia Law Review 121, No. 4, 1075-1172 (2021).
Greene v. McElroy, 360 U.S. 474, 79 S. Ct. 1400, 3 L. Ed. 2d 1377, No. No. 84,84 (U.S. Supreme Court 29 June 1959).
Howard E. Shuman, Politics and the Budget: The Struggle between the President and the Congress (Prentice-Hall, 1992).
James Petras, “The geopolitics of plan Colombia”, 35 Economic and Political Weekly 4617-23 (2001).
Jessica Tollestrup & James V. Saturno, “The Congressional appropriations process: An introduction” (2014).
Joachim Wehner, “195 Aaron Wildavsky, The Politics of the Budgetary Process”, in Martin Lodge, Edward C. Page & Steven J. Balla, eds., The Oxford Handbook of Classics in Public Policy and Administration 0 (Oxford University Press, 2015). https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199646135.013.17
Joseph Weir, “The Aerial Eradication of Illicit Coca Crops in Colombia, South America: Why the United States and Colombian Governments Continue to Postulate its Efficacy in the Face of Strident Opposition and Adverse Judicial Decisions in the Colombian Courts”, 10 Drake J. Agric. L. 205(2005).
Joseph R. Biden, Aid to “Plan Colombia”: The Time for US Assistance is Now: A Report to the Committee on Foreign Relations, United States Senate, Vol. 106 US Government Printing Office (2000).
John R. Gist, “The impact of annual authorizations on military appropriations in the US Congress,” Legislative Studies Quarterly 439-54 (1981).
Jonathan Hafetz, Obama’s Guantanamo: Stories from an Enduring Prison (NYU Press, 2016).
June S. Beittel, “Colombia: Background and US Relations (Updated)”, 12 No. 3 Current Politics and Economics of South and Central America 295-361 (2019).
Justin Delacour, “Plan Colombia: rhetoric, reality, and the press”, 27, No. 4 Social Justice 63-75 (2000).
J. Gregory Sidak, “The President’s Power of the Purse,” Duke Lj 1162 (1989).
Kate Stith, “Congress’ Power of the Purse”, 97 Yale LJ 1343 (1987).
Keith Larry Storrs & Connie Veillette, “Andean Regional Initiative (ARI): FY2002 Supplemental and FY2003 Assistance for Colombia and Neighbors”, Congressional Research Service (Library of Congress, 2003).
Kristin E. Hickman & Aaron L. Nielson, “Narrowing Chevron’s Domain”, 70 Duke LJ 931 (2020).
Luis Alberto Moreno, “Counterpoint: Plan Colombia and Human Rights”, 8, No. 1 Human Rights Brief 4 (2000).
Matthew B. Lawrence, “Congress’s Domain: Appropriations, Time, and Chevron,” Duke LJ 70, 1057 (2020).
Matthew B. Lawrence, “Disappropriation”, Columbia Law Review 120, No. 1, 1-90 (2020).
Marshall B. Lloyd, “Conflict, Intervention, and Drug Trafficking: Unintended Consequences of United States Policy in Colombia,” 36 Okla. City UL Rev. 293(2011).
McKaye Neumeister, “Reviving the Power of the Purse: Appropriations Clause Litigation and National Security Law”, 127 Yale LJ 2512 (2017).
Michael Shifter, “Plan Colombia: A Retrospective”, 6, No. 3 Americas Quarterly 36 (2012).
Otto A. Davis, M. A. H. Dempster & Aaron Wildavsky, “A Theory of the Budgetary Process”, 60, No. 3 American Political Science Review 529-47 (1966). https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/apsrev/v60y1966i03p529-547_13.html
Robert L. Heilbroner, “Aaron Wildavsky,” The Politics of the Budgetary Process “(Book Review)”, 31, No. 4 Social Research 494 (1964).
Samuel R. Howe, “Congress’s War Powers and the Political Question Doctrine After Smith v. Obama”, 68 Duke LJ 1231 (2018).
Sandy Streeter, Congressional Appropriations Process: An Introduction (DIANE Publishing, 2011).
Sheridan Pauker, “Spraying first and asking questions later: congressional efforts to mitigate the harmful environmental, health, and economic impacts of US-sponsored coca fumigation in Colombia”, 30 Ecology LQ 661(2003).
Sierra Club v. Trump. 929 F.3d 670 (9th Cir. 2019), No. No. 19-16102,19-16300,19-16102 (n.d.).
Smith v. Obama, 217 F. Supp. 3d 283, No. 217 F. Supp. 3d 283 (D.D.C. 2016) (UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 21 November 2016).
Stephen Dycus, William C. Banks, Peter Raven Hansen & Stephen I. Vladeck, National security law (Aspen Publishing, 2022).
Tel-Oren v. Libyan Arab Republic. 726 F.2d 774 (D.C. Cir. 1984), No. TEL-OREN,81-1871, Nos. 81-1870,s. 81-1870 (U.S. Court of Appeals — District of Columbia Circuit el 3 de febrero de 1984).
Thomas R. Pickering, “Anatomy of Plan Colombia”, 5, No. 2 The American Interest 71-77 (2009).
Thomas W. Merrill & Kristin E. Hickman, “Chevron’s domain”, 89 Geo. LJ 833 (2000).
United States. General Accounting Office. Office of the General Counsel. Principles of Federal Appropriations Law. Vol. 3. US General Accounting Office, 1991.
William C. Banks & Peter Raven-Hansen, National Security Law and the Power of the Purse (Oxford University Press, 1994).
William Stull Holt, Treaties defeated by the Senate: A study of the struggle between President and Senate over the conduct of foreign relations (The Lawbook Exchange, 2000).
Zachary Elkins, Tom Ginsburg & James Melton, “Conceptualizing Constitutions”, in The endurance of national constitutions (Cambridge University Press, 2009).
Esta revista científica se encuentra registrada bajo la licencia Creative Commons Reconocimiento 4.0 Internacional. Por lo tanto, esta obra se puede reproducir, distribuir y comunicar públicamente en formato digital, siempre que se reconozca el nombre de los autores y a la Pontificia Universidad Javeriana. Se permite citar, adaptar, transformar, autoarchivar, republicar y crear a partir del material, para cualquier finalidad (incluso comercial), siempre que se reconozca adecuadamente la autoría, se proporcione un enlace a la obra original y se indique si se han realizado cambios. La Pontificia Universidad Javeriana no retiene los derechos sobre las obras publicadas y los contenidos son responsabilidad exclusiva de los autores, quienes conservan sus derechos morales, intelectuales, de privacidad y publicidad.
El aval sobre la intervención de la obra (revisión, corrección de estilo, traducción, diagramación) y su posterior divulgación se otorga mediante una licencia de uso y no a través de una cesión de derechos, lo que representa que la revista y la Pontificia Universidad Javeriana se eximen de cualquier responsabilidad que se pueda derivar de una mala práctica ética por parte de los autores. En consecuencia de la protección brindada por la licencia de uso, la revista no se encuentra en la obligación de publicar retractaciones o modificar la información ya publicada, a no ser que la errata surja del proceso de gestión editorial. La publicación de contenidos en esta revista no representa regalías para los contribuyentes.