United States V. Nixon, President Of The United States

Want to read the rest of this paper? Join Essayworld today to view this entire essay and over 50,000 other term papers

Supreme Court, the basic arguements were as
follows. President Nixon's attorneys argued that the District Court was out of
its jurisdiction when it issued the subpoena to Nixon, making the case void.
They stated that the dispute between the President and the Special Prosecutor
was strictly executive, and by mediating them, the court broke the doctrine of
seperation of powers. They also argued with executive privilege, the right of
the President to withold information from Congress. To this, the District Court
said that the judiciary, not the President, was the final arbiter of a claim of
executive privilege. The Court also argued that the Special Prosecutor was
vested power by the Attorney General who had the right under the constitution to
conduct the criminal litigation of the United States government.
In its decision, the Supreme Court affirmed the ruling of the District
Court. They ruled that President Nixon's insubordinance was unjustified. They
felt that neither the ...

Get instant access to over 50,000 essays. Write better papers. Get better grades. Already a member? Login

CITE THIS PAGE: