  The decision stating that the president cannot claim executive privilege to withhold evidence in a criminal investigation. (20 min) |
|
| Teacher's GuideSUPREME COURT DECISIONS THAT CHANGED THE NATION:
U.S. V. NIXON Introduction One of the central concepts of the Constitution is the separation of powers among the legislative, executive and judicial branches of government. But two hundred years of American history have shown that the respective powers of the three branches sometimes overlap and conflict. U.S. v. Nixon is an example of just such a conflict. It provoked an assertion by the President that he must have strict confidentiality of his correspondence and other materials in order to operate the office of the Chief Executive effectively. When these materials were used as evidence necessary in a criminal trial, the question presented to the Supreme Court wasw: Which brach should prevail? U.S. v. Nixon can be used in an American history or government class to demonstrate that the separation of powers is not a static concept, but one that is continually evolving and developing. • Summary of Content The Framers of the Constitution wanted to create a government where the three branches, legislative, executive, and judicial would be as distinct as possible yet cooperate for the effective function of government. Their view of history had tught them that the concentration of power in the hands of the few led to tyranny, and the loss of personal liberties. But try as they might, the framers could not prevent some overlapping powers. In this case, President Nixon claimed the right to executive privilege, and refused to surrender documents in his possession despite a Federal court subpoena. In reaching its decision, in this case, the Supreme Court drew upon the famous statement of Justice John Marshall in Marbury v. Madison, 1803: “It is emphatically the province and the duty of the court to say what the law is.” The Court also stressed the need for the accused in a criminal case to have access to every person’s evidence, since to do otherwise would injure the integrity of the justice system. At the same time, while rejecting President Nixon’s claim to executive privilege, in this case, the Court acknowledged a limited right of executive privilege in instances where national security or military and diplomatic confidentiality might demonstrably require it. • Topics for Essays and Debate 1. The Supreme Court oversteps its Constitutional bounds when it claims that it is the final judge of the limits of executive privilege. 2. The President must of necessity be totally immune from the actions of the courts. 3. Congress may not force the President to incriminate himself by subpoenaing information which may be used in an impeachment proceeding against him. 4. The President is no more above the law than any private citizen. Any legal requirement, including the requirement to supply information under a subpoena, applies to the President just as it does to a private citizen.. • Questions for Discussion, Review and Research: 1. How can judges determine if subpoenaed material from a President is, or is not, harmful to the national interest? 2. The Court’s decision U.S. v. Nixon says that while the President is not above the law, he is unique within the law. Do you agree or disagree? Why or why not? 3. Is the Supreme Court the proper government agency to define the limits of executive privilege? 4. Why did the Supreme Court reject the concept of “absolute executive privilege?” 5. If Congress were to legislate guidelines to limit the concept of executive privilege, what would be your recommendations? 6. Should the President be absolutely immune from liability for civil damages resulting from his official acts? (See Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.D. 731, (1982). 7. Nixon accepted the decision of the Supreme Court, despite the fact that it led to his removal from office. What do you think would have happened if he refused? |
|