Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683 (1974), was a landmark decision [1] of the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court unanimously ordered President Richard Nixon to deliver tape recordings and other subpoenaed materials related to the Watergate scandal to a federal district court.
Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 731 (1982), was a United States Supreme Court decision written by Justice Lewis Powell dealing with presidential immunity from civil liability for actions taken while in office.
The Ford pardon of Nixon also played a role in the recent Supreme Court decision granting presidents immunity from prosecution for actions that are deemed "official." Said McQuade: "Now we find ...
The several civil cases against Trump in the district and appeals courts in Washington, D.C. for his role in the violence of January 6, 2021, are pending and will likely influence the criminal cases elsewhere. [17] The appeals court panel ruled on December 1, 2023, that the district trial court was correct in dismissing the broad presidential ...
Though the case was decided after Nixon left office, the court ruled in his favour, deciding that “the President’s absolute immunity extends to all acts within the ‘outer perimeter’ of his ...
List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 432; List of United States Supreme Court cases; List of United States Supreme Court cases by the Burger Court; List of United States Supreme Court cases involving the First Amendment; Beauharnais v. Illinois, 343 U.S. 250 (1952) Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969) R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul ...
President Richard Nixon entered office in 1969 with Chief Justice Earl Warren having announced his retirement from the Supreme Court of the United States the previous year. . Nixon appointed Warren E. Burger to replace Earl Warren, and during his time in office appointed three other members of the Supreme Court: Associate Justices Harry Blackmun, Lewis F. Powell, and William Rehnq
Nixon. [6] The Court rejected the argument that the Act invaded Richard Nixon's right of privacy, as there would be limited intrusion through the screening of his documents, the public has a legitimate reason to want to know more about the President's historical documents (as he is a public figure), and the impossibility of separating the small ...