Quick Summary
During a meeting, a recording device was discovered in the Oval Office. The special prosecutor requested these tapes to demonstrate that President Nixon and his advisors had abused their authority and broken the law. President Nixon asserted Executive Privilege.
Rule of Law
The President cannot use executive privilege to avoid providing evidence in a criminal prosecution, while the theory is applicable in other circumstances.
Facts of the Case
During a hearing in Congress about the break-in at Watergate, it was found that President Nixon (defendant) had put a recording device in the Oval Office.
The special prosecutor in charge of the case asked for access to these recorded conversations to show that President Nixon and his advisors had abused their power and broken the law.
The President said he had the executive privilege and wouldn’t give the recordings to the public. It was questioned why President Nixon only partially complied with the special prosecutor’s requests. In the end, the case went to the United States Supreme Court.
The court decided that there are limits to presidential privilege. Nixon filed a formal claim of privilege and tried to stop the investigations. The United States District Court rejected the request for the District of Columbia. The Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari.
Issue
Is the President’s ability to maintain the confidentiality of certain information using his “executive privilege” immune to judicial review?
Holding and Conclusion
No.
The Supreme Court held that neither the idea of separation of powers nor the general necessity for the secrecy of high-level communications alone might support an absolute, unqualified presidential privilege.
The court acknowledged a limited presidential privilege in military and diplomatic issues but prioritized “the basic requirements of due process in the impartial administration of justice.”
The President must thus comply with the subpoena and deliver the requested recordings and documentation. Nixon resigned immediately after the recordings were made public.
Reasoning and Analysis
The court decided that a claim of Presidential privilege about materials subpoenaed for use in a criminal trial can’t get in the way of what the court needs to do if the claim isn’t based on military or diplomatic secrets but a general interest in confidentiality.
Relevant FAQs of this case
Was this case brief helpful?