Executive Privilege

Executive Privilege Virginia Commonwealth University November 14, 2012 In the past, the motive of decision maker favour has been economic consumption by hot seats to conceal entropy that has to do with unusual affairs and negotiations, military, national security issues as well as deliberations and policy devising that is through amongst the chairwoman and his vellicate aides. This berth is only dod when relative asks the professorship or one of his top aides to explicate either of the information pertaining to an event or situation.If the professorship then feels that split of this information acquires to be kept closed book to nurse the beat out bet of the public, or the other issues listed previously, then he will practice decision maker director immunity in purchase order to non give that information to sex act. A huge part of executive liberty is to protect the deliberations and advice inclined by the prexys aides. When the Presidents adv isors give him advice, they lease to be able to give him the best advice possible and if there is a chance that any amour they express could be made public.For instance if the President and advisors argon discussing what inevitably to be done in relation to a unlike force and one suggests to nuke them, one suggests a covert plan of attack and one suggests a nonviolent resolution. If the final decision is a peaceful resolution, and Congress asks for all of the information on the subject, then the President should use executive exclusive right to keep those other possible outcomes from going public, both(prenominal) to keep the public from getting out of control or uneasy and to keep the other country from finding out the other options and retaliating.This power ensures that the Presidents advisors jackpot be completely honest and word what needs to be said without being worried about their haggling being taken the vituperate way or too pungent or hurt their image. A big line of descent for those against executive perquisite is that there is nothing in the disposition about it even though there is something about Congress keeping secrets. word I states that Each accommodate shall keep a journal of its proceedings, and from prison term to time publish the same, excepting much(prenominal) parts as whitethorn in their judgment read secretiveness (US Constitution, Article 1 Section 5). Their argument is that the Constitution states that each offer can withhold information that they think should be kept secret and there is nothing about secrecy when it comes to the Presidents powers, yet just because the words atomic number 18 not explicitly in the constitution does not mean that this power was not intended for the President.Even our founding fathers appreciated the importance of executive privilege and that is highlighted by this passage taken from The flora of horse parsley Hamilton. In 1794, the Senate asked President George chapiter, to lay before the Senate the correspondences which lay down been had among the Minister of the get together States at the Republic of France, and said Republic, and amongst said Minister and the office of Secretary of State. Washington consulted his cabinet members, Henry Knox, Alexander Hamilton, and Edmund Randolph.Alexander Hamilton later wrote General Knox is of the opinion that no part of the correspondences should be move to the Senate Colonel Hamilton is of the opinion that the correct mode of proceeding is to do what General Knox advises only when the principle is safe, by excepting such parts as the President may choose to withhold Mr. Randolph is of the opinion that all correspondence proper, from its nature, to be communicated to the Senate, should be sent only when that what the President thinks is improper, should not be sent.Washington later told the Senate by and by an examination of the correspondence, I directed copies and translations to be made except in those particulars, which, in my judgment, for public considerations, ought not to be communicated. (Hamilton 1851) Three of these men subscribe the constitution and contri entirelyed a great deal towards it and they clearly conceptualize that it is the Presidents mighty to withhold information that he deems unfit to be made public. When it comes to foreign affairs it is very important that the President has the world power to use executive privilege.For instance, if the unify States was making a treaty with another(prenominal) country, both countries may have to give things up in order to come to an agreement, and everything considered by both sides as well as everything hold upon should not be made public for everyone, including other countries to see. This is best verbalise in 1796 by George Washington after the House of Representatives requested that he give them information concerning his instructions to the United States Minister to Britain regarding the treaty negotiat ions between the United States and Britain.Washington replied by saying The nature of foreign negotiations requires caution, and their success essential often depend on secrecy and even when brought to a destruction a full disclosure of all the measures, demands, or eventual concessions which may have been proposed or contemplated would be extremely impolitic for this might have a pernicious influence on future negotiations, or larn immediate inconveniences, perhaps danger and mischief, in relation to other powers.The fatality of such caution and secrecy was one cogent reason for vesting the power of making treaties in the Presidentthe boundaries fixed by the Constitution between the different departments should be preserved, a just regard to the Constitution and to the occupation of my office.. , forbids a compliance with your request. (Richardson 1897) As Washington states, we cannot simply make every detail public because other countries may retaliate and they will as well be less likely to deal with the United States in the future. However, by invoking executive privilege the President can protect that information from causing such havoc.As he stated, it is not only the Presidents right to use executive privilege, but it is his duty to use it in situations that require secrecy. Without a doubt executive privilege can have its usefulness, but it should only be invoked in certain, specific situations. In our recent accounting this has not been the case, some of our Presidents have essay to abuse the power of executive privilege, giving it a bad name and encouraging people to believe it should be done out-of-door with. When President Richard Nixon was in office, the Watergate scandal surfaced and Congress asked him to produce all of the information he and his aides had on the case.In an sweat to conceal what had been done as well as to protect everyone from punishment, President Nixon tried to use executive privilege. This case was brought to the U nited States Supreme judicatory because the executive privilege was being use to protect one of Nixons advisors from lamentable prosecution, thus obstructing justice. This was by far an abuse of executive privilege and fall outs many to want it gotten rid of, however just because a power can be abuse does not mean that its use should ascertain it just means that restrictions need to be put in to place.This is highlighted by the ruling of the Supreme Court. The Court acknowledged the need for the President to used executive privilege, but determined that in cases of inquiry into possible criminal actions, the Executive has to release relating information. If we want to curb the abuse of executive privilege, we need to put guidelines into place, because without them, the meaning of executive privilege is at the discretion of the President until checked by other branches. President Nixon was n each the first nor hold out President to abuse this power (United States v Nixon 1974).P resident Bill Clinton also tried to invoke executive privilege in a very wrong way as well. Clinton tried to use executive privilege to hold his advisors from testifying on whether he had sexual relations with Monica Lewinski or not. However, this claim of executive privilege was shot down, rightfully so (Baker 2012). These instances of abuse may lead some to think it is just a better option to not have executive privilege, but as long as barriers and restrictions can be put into place on it to prevent this from happening in the future, this power needs to stay around.This comes with some exceptions this power should only be used when the President truly believes that if this information were to get out it would either be damaging to the public or in the best interest of the public to not find out. This power should also be used in situations where the President needs to protect national security scholarship and other matters as well as being used to protect military secrets, oper ations and intelligence.Lastly, this power should be used in situations where the United States is dealing with a foreign power, whether it is a treaty, a negotiation, a impact or anything else containing sensitive material that either the United States or the foreign power needs to be kept secret. This brings up another argument against executive privilege. Some feel that this power should be done away with because Congress does not have the power of checks and balances over executive privilege however that is not the case.If the President is refusing to give Congress the information that they are asking for, they can decide to stop funding things that the President is seek to do. They can also hold people in disdain of Congress, which was done as recently as this year in the Fast and maddened case where Congress demanded that Attorney General Eric Holder give them all the information on this case. President Obama stepped in and claimed executive privilege, however in a respons e to this, Congress moved, then voted to hold Holder in contempt of Congress unless he hands over the information (Silverleib 2012).Another thing Congress can do if the President continues to refuse to cooperate is to summon him. This would obviously be only done in serious situations, but would work either to get their message across or to march future Presidents that they cannot just invoke executive privilege without consequence. On top of this, the courts can rule on cases where the President tries to use executive privilege like they did in the case with President Nixon.Articles II of the Constitution states that the President shall from time to time give to the Congress information of the state of the union, and barrack to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and convenient (US Constitution Article II Section 3) As the Constitution says, the President does need to inform Congress on the State of the Union from time to time, however it does not say anywhere that the President is required to identify all the information having to do with certain incidents.Between Article I and Article II, others take this to mean that Congress has an unlimited power of inquiry, but in reality that is not the case. This fact has been ruled on multiple clock by different courts, where usually they determine that either the President does not have to give up the information, or that the President has to give up certain aspects of that information based on other laws. It is also Congresss right and duty to challenge the President when he uses executive privilege, in order to make sure that the power is not being abused, which is the exact reason for having separate branches and a balance of power.If it wasnt for executive privilege, other countries might be less inclined to deal with the United States because they fear that every detail could go public. Along the same lines the presidents advisors cant give their best advice if they have to agit ate that anything they say could be made public. Military secrets and intelligence also needs to be protected to better ensure our troops safety as well as protect our country and citizens from retaliation after an undefended military operation. There is also information that needs to remain secret because it is in the best interest of the public to not find out.Lastly and almost importantly, if it wasnt for executive privilege, national security and military intelligence matters could be made public, exposing our informants and jeopardizing our national security. In order to keep this power unrecorded and protect sensitive information, the United States needs to add guidelines or an amendment that powerful codifies executive privilege to prevent its abuse. Once this is done, in theory, there would not be any more issues of whether power can or cannot be used.Everything would be stated to say that the President can only use executive privilege in the situations previously stated and any other instance where executive privilege is claimed would be thrown out. Executive privilege helps to protect our citizens, our national security and our good standing and ability to discuss with other countries. If we were not able to guarantee that level of secrecy it would be nearly impossible to conduct policy making, decision making, foreign negotiations, treaties, as well as threaten the United States and their citizens safety.References Baker, Peter, and Susan Schmidt. Washingtonpost. com Special Report Clinton Accused. Washington Post Breaking News, World, US, DC News & Analysis. N. p. , 6 May 1998. Web. 8 Nov. 2012. http//www. washingtonpost. com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/starr050698. Hamilton, Alexander, and John C. Hamilton. The works of Alexander Hamilton comprising his correspondence, and his political and authorized writings, exclusive of the Federalist, civil and military. New York J. F. Trow, 1851.Print. Richardson, James D.. A compilation o f the messages and paper of the presidents. New York Bureau of national literature, 1897. Print. Silverleib, Alan. House holds Holder in contempt CNN. com. CNN. com Breaking News, U. S. , World, Weather, Entertainment & Video News. N. p. , 29 May 2012. Web. 5 Nov. 2012. http//www. cnn. com/2012/06/28/politics/holder-contempt/index. html. United States v. Nixon, 418 U. S. 683 (1974) (Justice Burger Opinion of the Court) United States Constitution, 1789