Us Vs Nixon Essay

485 Words2 Pages
United States v. Nixon and Clinton v. Jones should have had the same outcome from the Supreme Court. Both, former President 's violated the law and wanted to use presidential privileges to dismiss their cases. In the United States v. Nixon, the Court had the right to order the President to relinquish the tapes to Congress to use as evidence for the trial against the seven members held accountable. Those accused were owed a duty by the Court to be given a fair and speedy trial. In the Clinton v. Jones case, the Court should have not granted the former President Clinton immunity because the general public needs to realize that not even the President can violate the law and get away with it. I agree with the Supreme Court on placing emphasizes on keeping the presidential power in check but respecting the doctrine of separation of powers. The Court has the power to hear cases that involve federal questions because the…show more content…
In my opinion, I believe that Nixon and Clinton forgot that they are liable for actions that are not related to the duties listed in Article II of the United States Constitutions. That each branch has their privileges but when their actions and decisions are questionable the other branches have the power to check. Therefore, when the Supreme Court formulate their opinions they did not violate the doctrine of separation of powers. When there is an issue raised that involves the Constitution, the Court has the right to hear the case because the judicial branch has the power to interpret the Constitution. Judicial review established in Marbury v. Madison, the court has the power to interpret what the statute means and if it is in accordance or contradiction with the Constitution. Therefore, I do not believe that the decisions affected the power of the
Open Document