''Nixon v. General Services Administration'', 433 U.S 425 (1977), is a landmark court case concerning the principle of presidential privilege and whether the public is allowed to view a President's “confidential documents”.. The

Presidential Recordings and Materials Preservation Act The Presidential Recordings and Materials Preservation Act (PRMPA) of 1974 (, codified at note is an act of Congress enacted in the wake of the August 1974 resignation of President Richard M. Nixon.Gerald Ford Gerald Rudolph Ford Jr. ( ; born Leslie Lynch King Jr.; July 14, 1913December 26, 2006) was an American politician who served as the 38th president of the United States from 1974 to 1977. He was the only president never to have been elected ...

in 1974, ordered that the Administrator of the

General Services Administration The General Services Administration (GSA) is an independent agency of the United States government established in 1949 to help manage and support the basic functioning of federal agencies. GSA supplies products and communications for U.S. gover ...

obtain President

Richard Nixon Richard Milhous Nixon (January 9, 1913April 22, 1994) was the 37th president of the United States, serving from 1969 to 1974. A member of the Republican Party, he previously served as a representative and senator from California and was ...

’s presidential papers and tape recordings. In addition, the Act further ordered that government archivists seize these materials. These archivists would preserve the material deemed historic and return to former President Nixon the materials deemed private. Furthermore, this Act stated that material that was preserved could be used in judicial hearings and proceedings. Immediately after this Act was enacted, Richard Nixon filed a lawsuit in a federal district court claiming that the Act violated the principle of

separation of powers Separation of powers refers to the division of a state's government into branches, each with separate, independent powers and responsibilities, so that the powers of one branch are not in conflict with those of the other branches. The typi ...

, the principle of presidential privilege, Nixon's personal privacy, his

First Amendment First or 1st is the ordinal form of the number one (#1). First or 1st may also refer to: *World record, specifically the first instance of a particular achievement Arts and media Music * 1$T, American rapper, singer-songwriter, DJ, and reco ...

right of association, and further asserted that it amounted to a constitutionally prohibited

Bill of Attainder A bill of attainder (also known as an act of attainder or writ of attainder or bill of penalties) is an act of a legislature declaring a person, or a group of people, guilty of some crime, and punishing them, often without a trial. As with attai ...

Background

Historically, all presidential papers were considered the personal property of the president. Some took them at the end of their terms while others destroyed them. Franklin D. Roosevelt was the first to make them available to the public when he donated them to the National Archives in 1939, as the Franklin D. Roosevelt Presidential Library and Museum, but did so voluntarily. This case was argued a few years after the

Watergate scandal The Watergate scandal was a major political scandal in the United States involving the administration of President Richard Nixon from 1972 to 1974 that led to Nixon's resignation. The scandal stemmed from the Nixon administration's contin ...

had broken out and the President was compelled to resign in the face of the impeachment process against Richard Nixon. The former President objected to the seizure of documents from the Nixon Administration, as he did not want to further tarnish the public's already negative perception of him as a corrupt and scheming politician. Given that he was not liable to criminal prosecution, as he had been pardoned, Nixon's concern for his reputation appears to be the primary reason that he did not want his private documents to be inspected by historical archivists and made available to the public. The forty two million pages of documents and eight hundred and eighty tape recordings produced during his presidency would reveal critical information about Nixon's involvement in the Watergate scandal, his real opinions on a wide range of issues, and further perpetuate his image as a paranoid and secretive President. These are some of the underlying personal motives as to why Richard Nixon chose to file a lawsuit against the Administrator of General Services the day after President Ford signed the

The conflict

The main conflict in this case was whether a federal statute authorizing that the President would have his records inspected by government archivists violated the principles of separation of powers and executive privilege. In addition, there was a conflict in this case whether a President's personal materials were deemed private even though the public had a high level of interest in them. Furthermore, it was debatable whether the government's seizure of President Nixon's materials was actually "limited intrusion". The main conflict in this case was whether it was constitutional for government archivists to seize President Nixon's materials.

Decision

The

Supreme Court A supreme court is the highest court within the hierarchy of courts in most legal jurisdictions. Other descriptions for such courts include court of last resort, apex court, and high (or final) court of appeal. Broadly speaking, the decisions of ...

decided that the Presidential Recordings and Material Preservation Act was constitutional, ruling in favor of the Administrator of General Services in a 7-2 vote and rejecting all claims that Nixon made in his lawsuit against the Administrator of General Services. The Court rejected Nixon's claim that the Act violates the presidential privilege of confidentiality, finding that the government archivists that would review Nixon's documents and tape recordings had done so with other presidents' papers without violating the confidentiality of communications between presidents and their advisers. 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 ''In camera'' (; Latin: "in a chamber"). is a legal term that means ''in private''. The same meaning is sometimes expressed in the English equivalent: ''in chambers''. Generally, ''in-camera'' describes court cases, parts of it, or process wh ...

inspection of documents In pre-trial discovery, parties may have the right to inspect documents that are relevant to the case. In civil cases, the concept of "documents" has been interpreted broadly, and it generally includes any item that contains descriptive information, ...

permitted under the Court's majority decision in ''United States v. Nixon''. 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 amount of private materials without first thoroughly screening all of his documents. The Court determined that Richard Nixon's privacy rights were still protected under the Act, and that his complaints about his lack of privacy were overstated. Beyond the questions of confidentiality, privilege and privacy, the Court found that the Act does not interfere with President Nixon's

rights of association. Further, the Court determined that the federal government had compelling reasons to preserve Nixon's Presidential materials, and archival screening was the least restrictive way to review presidential materials and to return private papers to the president. Finally, the Act did not violate the Bill of Attainder clause of the Constitution because this Act does not convict former President Nixon of a crime and does not expose him to prosecution. The Court commented that Congress was justified in approving the Act because Congress believed Nixon was a President who could serve as an example for future presidents. The Court determined that the purpose of this Act was not to punish President Nixon, but simply to legislate a policy that had a purpose of preserving important historical artifacts and presidential records. Chief Justice Warren Burger and Justice William Rehnquist wrote dissenting opinions. Rehnquist vigorously argued that under the provisions of the Act, all presidential papers could be seized by Congress at any time, and the Act was thus excessive. Burger asserted that the Administrator was not justified in engaging in such an invasion of privacy with respect to a President's documents. In addition, Burger contended that the Administrator was also encroaching on President Nixon's Executive Privilege and that this Act amounted to an unconstitutional Bill of Attainder.

References

External links

* {{Gerald Ford United States Supreme Court cases United States Supreme Court cases of the Burger Court United States privacy case law 1977 in United States case law Richard Nixon General Services Administration