President nixon versus the united states
418 u.s. 683
Rehnquist recused himself due to his close association with several Watergate conspirators, including Attorneys General John Mitchell and Richard Kleindienst , prior to his appointment to the Court indicated to each other that they would rule against the president. There is nothing novel about governmental confidentiality. The very integrity of the judicial system and public confidence in the system depend on full disclosure of all the facts, within the framework of the rules of evidence. A President and those who assist him must be free to explore alternatives in the process of shaping policies and making decisions, and to do so in a way many would be unwilling to express except privately. Hearings on the Nomination of William B. Does the claim of executive privilege damage the precedent set by the 5th Amendment, which ensures due process? We agree with Mr. Since we find resolution of this issue unnecessary to resolution of the question whether the claim of privilege is to prevail, the cross-petition for certiorari is dismissed as improvidently granted and the remainder of this opinion is concerned with the issues raised in No. Moreover, the delegation of authority to the Special Prosecutor in this case is not an ordinary delegation by the Attorney General to a subordinate officer: with the authorization of the President, the Acting Attorney General provided in the regulation that the Special Prosecutor was not to be removed without the "consensus" of eight designated leaders of Congress. In United States ex rel. Nixon also obstructed the Federal Bureau of Investigation FBI in its inquiry and authorized secret cash payments to the Watergate burglars in an effort to prevent them from implicating the administration. Since this matter came before the Court during the pendency of a criminal prosecution, and on representations that time is of the essence, the mandate shall issue forthwith.
As the Supreme Court drama was unfolding, the House Judiciary Committee worked on three articles of impeachment against President Nixon. This cross-petition was granted June 1,U.
II of a President's communications and activities, related to the performance of duties under that Article. This [p] is nowhere more profoundly manifest than, in our view, that "the twofold aim [of criminal justice] is that guilt shall not escape or innocence suffer.
McGovernin one of the largest landslide victories in the history of American presidential elections: At his confirmation hearings, Attorney General William Saxbe testified that he shared Acting Attorney General Bork's views concerning the Special Prosecutor's authority to test any claim of executive privilege in the courts.
There is no contention here that the Special Prosecutor is guilty of any such impropriety. Jersey City, U. Moreover, all records of those meetings were sealed for more than 30 years after the Convention.
Haldeman, John D. C Since we conclude that the legitimate needs of the judicial process may outweigh Presidential privilege, it is necessary to resolve those competing interests in a manner that preserves the essential functions of each branch.
See also Powell v. United Mine Workers, U.
E Enforcement of the subpoena duces tecum was stayed pending this Court's resolution of the issues raised by the petitions for certiorari. Burr, 25 F. Here it is argued that the independence of the Executive Branch within its own sphere, Humphrey's Executor v. Berger v. Haldeman, John D. Sawyer, U. Under this test, in order to require production prior to trial, the moving party must show: 1 that the documents are evidentiary [n12] and relevant; 2 that they are not otherwise procurable reasonably in advance of trial by exercise of due diligence; 3 that the party cannot properly prepare for trial without such production and inspection in advance of trial, and that the failure to obtain such inspection may tend unreasonably to delay the trial; and 4 that [p] the application is made in good faith and is not intended as a general "fishing expedition. The regulation issued by the Attorney General pursuant to his statutory authority vests in the Special Prosecutor plenary authority to control the course of investigations and litigation related to all offenses arising out of the Presidential Election for which the Special Prosecutor deems it necessary and appropriate to assume responsibility, allegations involving the President, members of the White House staff, or Presidential appointees, and any other matters which he consents to have assigned to him by the Attorney General.
based on 86 review