Why is US v. Nixon important to US History?

Answer 1

US v. Nixon affirmed the Judicial branch's authority to check the Executive branch, and clarified when the President can invoke Executive Privilege. It also elevated the rights of the accused under the Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause and Sixth Amendment Confrontation clause over the right of Executive Privilege under specific circumstances.

Explanation

The Supreme Court acknowledged the validity of invoking Executive Privilege in general, but held that it did not provide absolute and unqualified protection, except possibly in the case of military and diplomatic affairs, which were irrelevant to the case. The Court also argued the judiciary had jurisdiction over the matter under Article III because the constitution was not intended to protect the President from legitimate criminal prosecution.

The tapes, which were used as evidence in the criminal conspiracy investigation and trial were determined to be fundamental to the exercise of the defendants' Fifth Amendment rights under the Due Process Clause and Sixth Amendment protection under the Confrontation Clause. This decision, too, is likely to hold in principle, unless the evidence involves military, diplomatic, or national security secrets (in which case, the evidence would be unavailable for evaluation).

Bear in mind the Watergate episode involved domestic politics, not foreign affairs or national security. In the opinion of United States v. Nixon, Chief Justice Burger defined the areas subject to absolute privilege, any or all of which could be invoked after September 11.

"However, neither the doctrine of separation of powers nor the need for confidentiality of high-level communications, without more, can sustain an absolute, unqualified Presidential privilege of immunity from judicial process under all circumstances. The President's need for complete candor and objectivity from advisers calls for great deference from the courts. However, when the privilege depends solely on the broad, undifferentiated claim of public interest in the confidentiality of such conversations, a confrontation with other values arises. Absent a claim of need to protect military, diplomatic, or sensitive national security secrets, we find it difficult to accept the argument that even the very important interest in confidentiality of Presidential communications is significantly diminished by production of such material for in camera inspection with all the protection that a district court will be obliged to provide."

Case Citation:

United States v. Nixon, 418 US 683 (1974)

For more information about United States v. Nixon, see Related Questions, below.