28 U.S.C. § 537 — Expenses of unforeseen emergencies of a confidential character
submitted 60 years ago by Pub. L. 89-554 to r/title-28-JUDICIARY-AND-JUDICIAL-PROCEDURE · 66 words · no verdicts yet
FBI money can pay for sudden emergencies that must stay secret. This only works if the specific appropriation law allows it. The Attorney General decides how much to spend and certifies it without listing details.
This section lets the FBI use its budget for surprise, confidential emergencies — but only under specific conditions.
Money appropriated (budgeted) for the FBI can be spent on "unforeseen emergencies of a confidential character." This means emergencies that (1) couldn't have been planned for in advance and (2) need to stay secret. But this only works when the specific appropriations law funding the FBI says so — it's not automatic. Any such spending happens under the direction of the Attorney General.
Normally, the government requires a detailed receipt (a "voucher") showing exactly what was purchased. This section changes that for these secret expenses: the Attorney General simply certifies how much money was spent, without having to specify what it was spent on if he decides that detail shouldn't be disclosed. That certification, by itself, is treated as sufficient proof of the expense — it satisfies the normal accounting requirement.
Appropriations for the Federal Bureau of Investigation are available for expenses of unforeseen emergencies of a confidential character, when so specified in the appropriation concerned, to be spent under the direction of the Attorney General. The Attorney General shall certify the amount spent that he considers advisable not to specify, and his certification is a sufficient voucher for the amount therein expressed to have been spent.
Source credit: (Added Pub. L. 89–554, § 4(c), Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 617.)
- 1966Enacted · Pub. L. 89-554 · 80 Stat. 617
A history note hasn’t been published yet. The record shows enactment by Pub. L. 89-554 on 1966-09-06.
all 0 arguments · sorted by: best
no arguments yet — make the first case