BU SINESS NAMEEXECUTIVE PRIV IL EGE

V OL UM E 1 , I SSUE 1

US v. Nixon, 1974 A P R I L 6, 2006

Scandal at Watergate!
On June 17, gis, and arrested talking to the CIA
1972, Frank Willis, them for breaking about obstructing the
Security Guard at into the Democratic FBI investigation,
Watergate Hotel, dis- National Headquar- claiming it would be
covered that there ters with “bugging” a national security
had been a break-in equipment in their risk. Nixon meticu-
at the hotel. He dis- possession. The tele- lously taped all
covered a piece of phone number of E. White House phone
tape on a door leav- Howard Hunt was conversations. The
ing it unlocked, and found in McCord’s court wanted to listen
removed it only to notebook, linking the to these tapes as evi-
find another piece burglars to the White dence in the court
stuck on the door House. The D.C. case against the bur-
later. Suspecting a district attorney con- glars. However,
break-in, he con- ducted an investiga- these tapes proved
tacted the D.C. po- tion on McCord and Nixon’s involvement
lice. eventually deter- in the plot and so he
The police mined that he had said that they were
discovered five men, been receiving pay- confidential and
Bernard Baker, Vir- ment from the Com- could not be
gilio González, mittee to Re-elect the heard.
Eugenio Martínez, President or CREEP. By Conor
James W. McCord, On June 23, Nixon Gilbert
Jr., and Frank Stur- was tape-recorded

Controversy in the Constitution http://tinyurl.com/l5epb

As president Nixon vs. judicial branches, giving them reason to Nixon and his ad-
argues his rights as it seems constitu- suspicion Nixon’s ministration are
president, the public tional power is the involvement in the highly valuable. By
is asking: what are important part of this Watergate Scandal, issuing a subpoena
they actually fighting case. Because the the recordings of for the tapes, the Dis-
about? In a heated District Court has ob- conversations in the trict Court had hoped
battle of executive tained information Oval Office kept by to easily obtain evi-
US V . N IX O N , 1 97 4 PAGE 2

Controversy in the Constitution (cont.)

dence regarding Nixon’s in-
volvement. Due to his power
as president, Nixon has made
the argument that because he
holds executive privilege, he
is “allowed an absolute privi-
lege of confidentiality for all
Presidential communica-
tions”. This means that be-
cause he is president, Nixon
does not have to hand over
any of these tapes. Contrary
to this, the judicial branch is
arguing that they are the
“ultimate arbiters of the Con-
stitution”, meaning that they
are the final interpreters for respect each other in regards
all matters dealing with the to this opinion. Seeing as this
Constitution. Arguing that battle shows discourtesy from
even though the president is, both branches, the final con-
under normal circumstances, clusion will definitely be his-
allowed to withhold materials torically worthy.
involved in a criminal investi- By Alexandra Braverman
gation, the courts still believe
that they have the final voice.
Unfortunately, adding to the
confusion of this governmen-
tal mess, each individual gov-
ernment is supposed to inter-
pret the constitution to the
best of their abilities, and then
each branch is supposed to

Nixon Resigns!
On August 8, 1974 President
Nixon resigned from office,
so that he would not have to
face almost certain removal
from office. He gave a tele-
vised speech to end his presi-
dency in which he never actu-
ally admitted doing anything
wrong, and only admitted that
he had made errors in judg- http://tinyurl.com/dxd55
ment. Gerald Ford replaced
Nixon as the 38th President, a them to believe there is some
man who lost the only time he kind of a conspiracy involved.
ever appeared on a ballot. By Casey Sheridan
Suspiciously, Ford has par-
doned Nixon of all federal
crimes, which has angered
many Americans and led

Results of the Case

During Watergate investiga-
tions, President Nixon cited
the privilege of the President,
executive privilege. Nixon
wanted to use this executive
in the criminal investigation
to refuse to show the tape re-
cordings that were subpoe-
naed by special prosecutor Ja-
worski. The President
claimed the tapes were confi-
dential and dealt with matters
of national security.
The court ruled unani-
mously, with the opinion de-
livered by Chief Justice Bur-
ger. All members agreed, but
the Rehnquist was not pre-
sent. The court decided that
while the president had cer-
tain privileges, they were sub-
ject to definition by the judi-
ciary, who were the final in-
terpreters of the Constitution.
According to the court, given
the circumstances of the
criminal investigation, Jawor-
ski had the power to overrule
presidential autonomy, and so
Nixon was forced to yield the
damning tapes.
By Jenny Chau