Executive Privilege

Where does the President of the United States get advice on policy matters, and is that advice protected from access by others, particularly the other branches of government?

     Leaders are always seeking information from others, and often seek advice about policy and how they conduct their responsibilities - this has been true for all times.  Until recently, and even then in only a few settings, like the Presidency of the United States, those advisory communications can be examined by courts and the Congress under most circumstances.  However, Presidents have often claimed the doctrine of "Executive Privilege" - a right for the President to keep them entirely private between himself and the person providing advice.  The Privilege applies in a complex way that often includes litigation.  It is important to remember that there has been massive litigation, and high controversy, from the time of George Washington.  There are some of the standards for applying the concept of "Executive Privilege":

  • Exactly how did the consultation occur - in the private offices of the President - or in the midst of a large crowd.  Either can be protected - but these sorts of circumstances determine the intent of the President to protect the information.
  •  
  • Who is the person?  Is the conferee a senior official or appointee expected to have important information or view on the subject in question.
  •  
  • How important is the subject in terms of current public issues?
  •  
  • How important is it that the challenging entity have the information?
  •  
  • How important is the information or relationship to matters of making public policy?
  •  
  • Is there criminal conduct related to the conversation in question, and is that criminal conduct related to government conduct or activities, or is that criminal conduct unrelated to government business?  Obviously, the privilege is weaker if such conduct is not related to government matters.  The Nixon Watergate situation is a classic example of severe government related criminality ultimately wiping out the privilege completely - it took years of litigation to get to that point.  When Nixon and his family tried to prevent administration documents from going to into the public sector and lost eventually on the basis of both court action and action from the Congress that requires Presidents to now place all their document in government managed archives.
  •  
  • The conflict arises in two basic scenarios.  The first in in conflicts between the President and the Congress.  The second is in court actions where testimony on these relationships is somehow involved.
  •  
  • Basically - the President must be awfully close to the action - to the conversation or document - for the doctrine to apply.
  •  
  • The doctrine does not apply to agencies and departments of the government - it fits only if the President is close to the circumstances of the inquiry.
  •  
  • While many of the subjects and resulting documents are classified, the level of classification or the status of classification does not really have much to do with the opening of these relationships.  Obviously other branches of the government have security clearances to manage such a security setting.
  •  
  • Court records are excellent sources of information about the Executive Privilege.
  •  
  • The Privilege is not available to an ex-President on any conversation or transaction from the moment he leaves office forward.  It does continue to apply to matters which occurred while the President was still in office.
  •  
  • As time passes and the matters involved are less relevant and the people involved are deceased, the privilege slowly disappears and is no longer applied.  The length of time is determine by statutes, policy of the National Archives, and sometimes by federal courts.

Sunday, February 03, 2008 07:03 PM

. .  .

 
.

PRESIDENTIAL-APPOINTMENTS.ORG PAGES

Home

The President's Cabinet

Appointments Process

Application Ideas

Services

Policy

Interior Department

Appointments

Approach to President

Services

Creeping Tyranny

Justice Department

Appointment Information

Clean Up Your Act

Blog Talk

Data Base Creation

State Department

Appointments Requiring Confirmation

Compensation

Federal Agencies

Developing Policy Stories

Defense Department

Appointee Choices

Confirmation Countdown

Consumer Product Safety Commission

Disclaimer

Commerce Department

2008 Appointments

Conflict of Interest

Indian Affairs

Economic Forces and Structures

Homeland Security

2008-2009 Transition

Planning Ahead

Food and Drug Administration

Focus

Department of Veterans Affairs

Appointment Tracking

Qualifications

Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Intense Searches

 Education

Bolton Recess Appointment

Science and Politics

Centers for Disease Control

Interesting Current Events

Department of Agriculture

Ceremonial Appointments

Subject Search

Fish and Game

Lame Duck Administration

Treasury

Current Appointment  Links

Executive Privilege

CONSUMER RELATED REGULATORY AGENCIES

Mission

Justice

Military Appointments

Federal Judiciary

Observations

Labor

Nominations Requested

Inspector's General

Odd Appointment Tales

Transportation

Recess Appointments

On Behalf of the People

Energy

Searching for Appointments

Presidential Appointees in Trouble

Health & Human Services

Supreme Court Appointments

Pros

Housing-Urban Development

White House Staff

  Power Strategies

Recent News Notes

Resource Pages Organization

Seminars 

2007 News Notes

2004-2006 News Notes


ONE PERSON, ONE VOTE - APPORTIONMENT PAGES

Apportionment Home    Apportionment Defined    History- One Person, One Vote


John T Isaacson
Copyright © 2001-2008  All rights reserved.
Updated: June 15 2008

Contacts:  Director@Presidential-Appointments.org or call 1 617 504 3699