You can see the text of the article here:
Here's the relevant part for this post:
- Suits by Comptroller General
If, under this chapter, budget authority is required to be made available for obligation and such budget authority is not made available for obligation, the Comptroller General is hereby expressly empowered, through attorneys of his own selection, to bring a civil action in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia to require such budget authority to be made available for obligation, and such court is hereby expressly empowered to enter in such civil action, against any department, agency, officer, or employee of the United States, any decree, judgment, or order which may be necessary or appropriate to make such budget authority available for obligation. No civil action shall be brought by the Comptroller General under this section until the expiration of 25 calendar days of continuous session of the Congress following the date on which an explanatory statement by the Comptroller General of the circumstances giving rise to the action contemplated has been filed with the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President of the Senate.
I am seeing a lot of arguments online saying that the only penalties for violation of the impoundment control are civil actions... and point to 687 in the article. This is used as an argument that the violation of ICA can't be used to impeach the president and that there can be no criminal penalties for violating the ICA.
This seems to be a big mistake to me as the civil actions in 687 are for the purpose of releasing money that's being held... not for the purpose of penalizing violators of the ICA. 687 says nothing about whether or not violators of the ICA should be punished or what the penalties should be.
My interpretation is that the punishment for violating the ICA is not discussed within the ICA itself... Have I got it wrong?
So the potential criminal penalty for violating the ICA would have to be decided elsewhere right? like in the courts? So couldn't the courts decide what criminal liabilities there are?
Or are there no penalties for violating the ICA?
Appreciate any clarification.