Exec. Privilege/Immunity and Impeachment

Question 1

1) Executive Privilege

Answer 1

exemption from rule of general application

Question 2

a) US v Nixon:

Answer 2

presumptive priv, but not absolute; must balance concerns re president’s activities/need for confidentiality and the fair administration of criminal justice

i) F: Nixon said he shouldn’t be required to turn over tapes of Watergate WH recordings against Nixon
ii) As opposed to communication related to foreign affairs/intel, this was related to criminal proceedings

Question 3

b) Benefits of absolute privilege:

Answer 3

nat’l security; even regardless of nat’l security, if pres’s convos are not absolutely confidential, advisors may not be as freely willing to give certain advice (chilling effect)

Question 4

2) Exec. Immunity:

Answer 4

absolute immunity from suits predicated on Pres’s official acts

Question 5

a) Nixon v Fitzgerald:

Answer 5

suit against Nixon for allegedly orchestrating his ouster for whistle-blowingfor Nixon

Question 6

Clinton v Jones:

Answer 6

Private acts not w/in scope: sexual harassment case against Pres for acts as governor–>rejected Clinton’s efforts to have suit dismissed or stayed until after term

Question 7

3) Impeachment:

Answer 7

Art. 2: civil officers may be impeached for “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors”

Question 8

Views for what is impeachable:

Answer 8

i) just statutory crimes
ii) whatever House of Reps deems impeachable–>counter: general agreement some activities aren’t impeachable

iii) only crimes that are relevant to ability to act in official capacity
(1) Clinton argument: perjury doesn’t implicate ability to be Pres (unlike, for instance, a judge)