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.
Nixon v. United States , 506 U.S. 224 (1993), was a United States Supreme Court decision that determined that a question of whether the Senate had properly tried an impeachment was political in nature and could not be resolved in the courts if there was no applicable judicial standard.
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 ...
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 ...
A "full, free, and absolute pardon" Questions dogged Ford right after he took office on Aug. 9, 1974, the morning after Nixon announced he would resign the presidency.. Ford, eager to put Nixon ...
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through the screening of his documents, the public has a legitimate reason to want to know more about the President's historical documents (as he is a public figure), and the impossibility of separating the small ...