George Washington refused to share documents related to a military expedition against Native Americans. Congress had demanded White House records and testimony from his staff. Washington met with his Cabinet and together they agreed the president had the authority to refuse Congress — in the public interest. So began the use of executive privilege. Every president, in some form, has invoked executive privilege.
Since John Dean did an impressive work during the 1968 presidential campaign, he was selected to be the White House Counsel. Although Dean rejected the offer at first, he finally agreed to take the position in July 1970. John Dean didn’t take over all power and authorities of previous Counselor in the beginning, and he was limited to handle with unimportant issues. After won the confidence from White House, Dean and his small team were allowed to give advises on any legal topics from immigration law to labor law regarding the President Nixon and his administration. In the autobiography, John Dean said he had to evaluate the potential conflicts of interest and gave proper advises on some litigations of anti-administration.
“When the President does it, that means that it is not illegal.” These words were uttered by former President Richard Nixon in an interview shortly after his impeachment. Regardless of the sociopolitical implications of such a statement, Nixon stated an important historical fact: that those in authority usually believe they are above the law. Throughout different periods of human history, leaders have often acted outside of their own laws for personal benefit. Whether one examines the Macedonian kingdom, the Roman Empire, or the various Islamic Caliphates, he will always find at least one leader who transgressed the laws of his nation in order to obtain a personal reward.
The president through the FDR's Court-Packing Plan had to ensure that he had the judicial arm in check and also balance its powers so that some of these legislations could be implemented (Lovell n.p). The executive arm of the government was checking and balancing the powers of the judiciary at this point in this event. The judiciary and the legislature also tried to ensure that the executive arm does not increase its powers and authority to the extent that it can control the other arms of
Without judges that protect the constitution, the travel ban might have still been in effect which would allow President Trump as well as other presidents to sign orders at will without living up to the constitution in full extent. In the words of Goldsmith, “the courts...remain supreme” (Goldsmith, 188). Additionally, agencies within the executive can be a check on the president. For example, when there were numerous reports that came out about Russia meddling in the election to help President Trump win, the Justice Department hired an outside special investigator, Robert Mueller, to find the underlying cause of the situation.
Rulings such as The Prize Cases 1862, Ex parte Merryman 1861, Ex parte Milligan 1866, Korematsu v. United States 1944, Youngstown Sheet and Tube v. Sawyer 1952, Rasul v Bush/ Handi v. Rumsfeld 2004, Bands of State of Washington v. United States 1929, Train v. City of New York 1975, Clinton v. City of New York 1998, United States v. Nixon 1974, Nixon v. Fitzgerald 1982, Clinton v. Jones 1997, Myers v. United States 1926 are Supreme Court cases that were fought to control the power of the president. Even the most influential and honored president has abused of the power granted to them. In the court case, Ex parte Milligan 1866 president Abraham Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus ignoring the ruling that it was unconstitutional. Court case Korematsu v. United States 1944 questioned if the ruling of president Franklin Roosevelt Executive Order 9066 was constitutional as it placed Japanese- Americans in internment camps during World War II regardless of their citizenship. Court case Youngstown Sheet and Tube v. Sawyer 1952
I agree with the Supreme Court on placing emphasizes on keeping the presidential power in check but respecting the doctrine of separation of powers. The Court has the power to hear cases that involve federal questions because the
His account of how the Nixon White House systematically used intimidation, impoundment of funds, secrecy and thin, though sinister invocations of "national security" and presidential prerogative to change the balance of constitutional power in the U.S. is the most deadly and lucid yet seen in print. At the end of the book Schlesinger urges
The United States v. Nixon was a United States supreme court case which resulted in a decision against Richard Nixon, ordering him to deliver tape recordings and other materials to a federal district court. It was important in the late states of the Watergate scandal, during the ongoing impeachment of Richard Nixon. The executive privilege had to do with some recordings during the Watergate scandal, he was forced to release them; however, Nixon stated that he didn’t have to due to the Executive Privilege. In the end, it ended up not working because they didn’t believe he had the right to use it. Embargo signaled a shift in the global financial balance of power to oil-producing states and triggered a slew of U.S. attempts to address foreign
In this situation, the executive privilege merely served as the amulet of the president to cover up his personal interest toward reelection, moreover, the investigation has been disrupted many times during the process and led to protest from many justice officials toward Nixon. It is clear that without supervision and regulation, the executive privilege did not serve its true purpose to protect the country and became a super untouchable protection for the president. Although after the protest, Nixon turned over some of the tapes rather than all of them, but the issue on properly use of executive privilege remains the
The United States Supreme Court is not transparent to the citizens in this country and they fail to publicly reveal reasoning’s to their decisions that they have made. The courts non-transparency make people wonder and uncomfortable for congress has to openly show how they voted one bills Jeffrey L. Fisher razes this type of questions in his article “The Supreme Court’s Secret Power” in The New York Times he raises concern for the Supreme Court and the justice; claiming that they have become too powerful and the people of this country deserve to see how each justice vote due we entrusted them I the position and we deserve to know if they are in good favor.
In 2017, the issue of Executive Privilege is almost as contested as it was in 1973 during the Nixon investigation. President Nixon was not able to invoke Executive Privilege to protect himself from the Watergate investigation, however, the same might not be true for President Trump. President Trump is currently at the center of an investigation into potential Russian meddling in the 2016 Presidential Elections. In December of 2016, the press was filled with headlines and articles reading, “American intelligence agencies have concluded with ‘high confidence’ that Russia acted covertly in the latter stages of the presidential campaign to harm Hillary Clinton’s chances and promote Donald J. Trump, according to senior administration officials” . This incident is being investigated by Special
Executive privilege has been referenced in many supreme court decisions and even some that are related directly to the current case that is before us today. In the second world war during the year 1944 the precedent setting supreme court case Korematsu Vs U.S. was argued setting the precedent that in a time of war (of which one we are in right now) the government could use the crucial notion of executive privilege to preserve national security. While the way it was executed is different in both cases surly there are some parallels. This case truly fleshes out what it means to have executive privilege and is an important case to keep in mind as we look at Hamdi v Rumsfeld. This case cited executive privilege as being able to override the rights
In recent years there has been debate on whether or not the president has too much power. The president 's power has increased over the years, I believe that this increase has given the president way too much power. The amount of power that the president has, can cause total destruction and can manipulate people into doing things that they do not actually believe in. A president should not have some of the powers that he possess, but they are given to him simply because he is the leader of the country. In my opinion the president should be allowed certain powers in order to run the country properly, he is also the leader of the country which grants him the right to have certain powers according to the constitution.
In the fourteenth century, Europe was experiencing famine that was followed by a plague known as the Black Death that affected most parts of the continent (Davis 45). The pandemic led to the loss of almost two-fifths of the European population. Such a situation meant that fewer Europeans were able to give their services as laborers in North America since most of them had passed away, and the remaining were still recovering from the loss of loved ones and caring for the few survivors from the plague who were still ailing and recovering. Evidently, there was a shortage of laborers, and this necessitated the need to look for alternative labor.
