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.
United States v Nixon. The special counsel’s office is citing the second, better-known Nixon case in its arguments to the court. United States v Nixon is considered a landmark decision and one ...
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.
Presidential immunity is the concept that a sitting president of the United States has both civil and criminal immunity for their official acts. [a] Neither civil nor criminal immunity is explicitly granted in the Constitution or any federal statute. [1] [2] The Supreme Court of the United States found in Nixon v.
In two other landmark precedents dealing with comparable executive powers, United States v. Nixon and Trump v. Thompson, all proceedings were completed in a little over three months in both cases ...
Executive privilege is the right of the president of the United States and other members of the executive branch to maintain confidential communications under certain circumstances within the executive branch and to resist some subpoenas and other oversight by the legislative and judicial branches of government in pursuit of particular information or personnel relating to those confidential ...
At the very start of the address, Nixon mourned the death of Senator Richard Russell Jr. [2] The address was known for introducing Nixon's "six great goals", [3]: 52 [4] which would go on to be reiterated in the 1972 State of the Union Address: [3]: 54 Welfare reform, particularly with the proposed Family Assistance Plan
The past work by government archivists had not harmed the institution of the presidency. Furthermore, the Court stated that the review of documents by government archivists would be no more of an intrusion than an in camera inspection of documents permitted under the Court's majority decision in United States v. Nixon. [6]