Live Chat Support

Wednesday, July 23, 2014

US v. Nixon Case Brief

US v Nixon Case Brief


There was an incident which involved the alleged violation of various federal statutes by some White House staff members as well as some political supporters of the President. The special prosecutor in the so called Watergate scandal, in line with this, issued a subpoena for the tape recordings made of President Nixon wherein he was allegedly discussing the said scandal together with some of his advisers.
President Nixon refused to submit the said tapes and in so doing, he alleged that he was entitled to such refusal due to his executive privileges as president. His counsel moved to quash the subpoena, citing the United States Constitution, Article II which referred to the grant of privilege to the President. One other contention that was raised was that the question is out of the jurisdiction of the Courts to decide, it being allegedly executive in nature since it involved only members of the executive branch of the government.


Is the grant of privilege to the president by Article II of the United States Constitution  absolute in nature?


Article II of the United States Constitution certainly grants the president privileges. He, as the chief executive of the government, is to be afforded great respect and deference. However, that privilege is not absolute in nature and it must be construed together with other interests of the state and constitution/.


It was held that the President’s executive privilege is not in any way absolute. The provision on it should also not be construed or interpreted on its own. When construed with the rest of the other articles in the Constitution, such privilege must necessarily give way to the requirements of speedy, fair trials as well as the ability of defendants to face their accusers which were provided by the Fourth and Fifth Amendments.

The Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the President, as chief executive, is indeed entitled to the said executive privilege. He is not an ordinary citizen and as such, he should not be treated as a regular citizen by the court. He must be treated with utmost deference due to his standing as leader of the country. However, that does not mean that his executive privilege is absolute. Such presidential rights should be constructed together with the right of an accused in criminal proceedings. It should not be interpreted and applied based solely on its specific provision. It must necessarily be implemented with deference to other rights. In particular, the said executive privilege was balanced by the Court together with the rights of individuals to face their accusers and to have a speedy as well as fair trial.

In this particular case, it should be noted that the Court acknowledged that the issue at bar involved a political dispute between two major section of the executive branch of the government. As such, it took care not to delve too deep into the said issue as it did not want to appear partisan and partial to one side. 

More Sample Case Briefs:

1. Regents of the University of California v. Bakke
2. Roe v. Wade Case Brief
3. Brown v. Board of Education Case Brief
4. Department of HHS v. Florida Case Brief
5. Miranda v. Arizona Case Brief
6. New York Times Co. v. Sullivan Case Brief
7. US v. Windsor Case Brief
8. Mapp v. Ohio Case Brief 
9. Korematsu v. US Case Brief
10. Plessy v. Ferguson Case Brief
11. Dred Scott v. Sandford Case Brief
12. Gideon v.  Wainwright Case Brief

13. Marbury v. Madison Case Brief

This is a sample US v. Nixon Case Brief from – the leading provider of reliable and affordable essay writing services and research paper writing services in the United States and the United Kingdom

No comments:

Post a Comment