 |
|
Are you unfamiliar with the concept that Congress is not
Posted on: November 7, 2019 at 12:43:44 CT
Spanky KU
Posts:
146380
Member For:
21.01 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
superior to the Executive (and vice versa). That extends to Congress requiring Executive Branch employees to testify about presidential communications.
SCOTUS ruled in US v Nixon that “the protection of the confidentiality of Presidential communications has … constitutional underpinnings,” meaning that executive privilege cannot be abrogated by statute.... they later clarified in Nixon v. Fitzgerald the privilege recognized in the 1974 Nixon ruling “is limited to communications ‘in performance of a President’s responsibilities … of his office,’ and made ‘in the process of shaping policies and making decisions.’”
Notably, in that same ruling the court rejected the president’s claim that such a privilege is absolute, emphasizing that “the impediment that an absolute, unqualified privilege would place in the way of the primary constitutional duty of the Judicial Branch to do justice in criminal prosecutions would plainly conflict with the function of the courts under Art III.” Instead, the court held that the executive privilege protected by Article II is a qualified privilege, and concluded that “it is necessary to resolve competing interests” between executive privilege and the role of the courts “in a manner that preserves the essential functions of each branch.”
Keep in mind that Nixon was a ruling that impacted a subpoena issued by a DOJ prosecutor, not Congress. It is doubtful that SCOTUS would rule that Congress can void executive privilege in this case, especially in light of the 'clarification' in Nixon v. Fitzgerald.
SCOTUS ruled in US v Nixon that “the protection of the confidentiality of Presidential communications has … constitutional underpinnings,” meaning that executive privilege cannot be abrogated by statute.... they later clarified in Nixon v. Fitzgerald the privilege recognized in the 1974 Nixon ruling “is limited to communications ‘in performance of a President’s responsibilities … of his office,’ and made ‘in the process of shaping policies and making decisions.’”
Notably, in that same ruling the court rejected the president’s claim that such a privilege is absolute, emphasizing that “the impediment that an absolute, unqualified privilege would place in the way of the primary constitutional duty of the Judicial Branch to do justice in criminal prosecutions would plainly conflict with the function of the courts under Art III.” Instead, the court held that the executive privilege protected by Article II is a qualified privilege, and concluded that “it is necessary to resolve competing interests” between executive privilege and the role of the courts “in a manner that preserves the essential functions of each branch.”
Keep in mind that Nixon was a ruling that impacted a subpoena issued by a DOJ prosecutor, not Congress. It is doubtful that SCOTUS would rule that Congress can void executive privilege in this case, especially in light of the 'clarification' in Nixon v. Fitzgerald.
Please explain why this message is being reported.
MESSAGE THREAD
Are you unfamiliar with the concept that Congress is not - Spanky KU - 11/7 12:43:44
-