Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="728ups" data-source="post: 5389105" data-attributes="member: 33372">hahaha more education!&nbsp; This has been decided LONG ago I present you you United Staes vs Nixon Judgment:The Supreme Court of the United States affirmed the district court’s decision to deny the President’s motion to quash the subpoena.Reasoning:The Court held that the presidential privilege is not absolute. The presidential privilege for confidential communications that do not concern the military, diplomacy or sensitive national security secrets may be rebutted as a result of the constitutional requirement to produce all relevant evidence in criminal cases. The Court stated that a general claim of presidential privilege based on public interest in confidentiality will not overcome the interest of justice in producing all evidence that is relevant.Here, the President fails to base his claim of privilege on military, diplomacy, or national security. The Court determined that the confidentiality claim is a generalized presidential privilege and that type of claim does not outweigh the interests of justice.Significance:This case outlined that the presidential privilege is not absolute in nature. The privilege does not extend to confidential communications that constitute relevant evidence in a criminal proceeding.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="728ups, post: 5389105, member: 33372"] hahaha more education! This has been decided LONG ago I present you you United Staes vs Nixon [B][I]Judgment:[/I][/B] The Supreme Court of the United States affirmed the district court’s decision to deny the President’s motion to quash the subpoena. [B][I]Reasoning:[/I][/B] The Court held that the presidential privilege is not absolute. The presidential privilege for confidential communications that do not concern the military, diplomacy or sensitive national security secrets may be rebutted as a result of the constitutional requirement to produce all relevant evidence in criminal cases. The Court stated that a general claim of presidential privilege based on public interest in confidentiality will not overcome the interest of justice in producing all evidence that is relevant. Here, the President fails to base his claim of privilege on military, diplomacy, or national security. The Court determined that the confidentiality claim is a generalized presidential privilege and that type of claim does not outweigh the interests of justice. [B][I]Significance:[/I][/B] This case outlined that the presidential privilege is not absolute in nature. The privilege does not extend to confidential communications that constitute relevant evidence in a criminal proceeding. [/QUOTE]

Verification