Executive Privilege--secrecy in Government: Hearings Before the Subcommittee on Intergovernmental Relations of the Committee on Government Operations, United States Senate, Ninety-fourth Congress, First Session on S. 2170, S. 2378, S. 2420, September 29 and October 23, 1975
United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Government Operations. Subcommittee on Intergovernmental Relations
U.S. Government Printing Office, 1976 - Executive privilege (Government information) - 647 pages
What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
Other editions - View all
action activities administration agency American appear assertion Attorney authority believe bill Chief claim classified committee communications concerning confidentiality Congress congressional constitutional controversy counsel course criminal decide decision Department determine directed disclosure discussion District Court documents duty effect establish evidence executive branch executive privilege exercise fact Federal foreign function give going Government grand jury hearings held House impeachment important interest involved issue Judge judicial Judiciary jurisdiction Justice kind legislative letter limited material matter ment Nixon Office Operations opinion particular persons political present President presidential problem procedure Professor protect question reason records refused relating reports request require resolution respect responsibility rules secrecy Secretary secrets Senator MUSKIE separation Special Prosecutor specific statement statute subcommittee subpoena supra Supreme Court tapes testimony thing tion United Washington withhold
Page 104 - It is important, likewise, that the habits of thinking, in a free country, should inspire caution in those intrusted with its administration, to confine themselves within their respective constitutional spheres, avoiding in. the exercise of the powers of one department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one, and thus to create, whatever the fona of government, a real despotism.
Page 348 - ... a textually demonstrable constitutional commitment of the issue to a coordinate political department; or a lack of judicially discoverable and manageable standards for resolving it; or the impossibility of deciding without an initial policy determination of a kind clearly for nonjudicial discretion ; or the impossibility of a court's undertaking independent resolution without expressing lack of the respect due coordinate branches of government ; or an unusual need for unquestioning adherence...
Page 290 - gist of the question of standing" is whether the party seeking relief has "alleged such a personal stake in the outcome of the controversy as to assure that concrete adverseness which sharpens the presentation of issues upon which the court so largely depends for illumination of difficult constitutional questions.
Page 26 - Prominent on the surface of any case held to involve a political question is found a textually demonstrable constitutional commitment of the issue to a coordinate political department; or a lack of judicially discoverable and manageable standards for resolving it; or the impossibility of deciding without an initial policy determination of a kind clearly for nonjudicial discretion...
Page 351 - In such cases their acts are his acts; and whatever opinion may be entertained of the manner in which executive discretion may be used, still there exists, and can exist, no power to control that discretion. The subjects are political. They respect the nation, not individual rights, and being intrusted to the executive, the decision of the executive is conclusive.
Page 297 - Whoever, being an officer or employee of the United States or of any department or agency thereof, publishes, divulges, discloses, or makes known in any manner or to any extent not authorized by law...
Page 33 - But even if courts could require full disclosure, the very nature of executive decisions as to foreign policy is political, not judicial. Such decisions are wholly confided by our Constitution to the political departments of the government, Executive and Legislative. They are delicate, complex, and involve large elements of prophecy. They are and should be undertaken only by those directly responsible to the people whose welfare they advance or imperil. They are decisions of a kind for which the...
Page 104 - But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this in one instance may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. The precedent must always greatly overbalance in permanent evil any partial or transient benefit which the use can at any time yield.
Page 337 - ... asserting privilege as to subpoenaed materials sought for use in a criminal trial is based only on the generalized interest in confidentiality, it cannot prevail over the fundamental demands of due process of law in the fair administration of criminal justice. The generalized assertion of privilege must yield to the demonstrated, specific need for evidence in a pending criminal trial.
Page 442 - ... question. It can authorize the taking of private property for public use. It can make laws regulating the relationships between employers and employees, prescribing rules designed to settle labor disputes, and fixing wages and working conditions in certain fields of our economy. The Constitution does not subject this law-making power of Congress to presidential or military supervision or control.