Document: 418 U.S. 683 94 S.Ct. 3090 41 L.Ed.2d 1039 UNITED STATES, Petitioner,v.Richard M. NIXON, President of the United States, et al. Richard Petitioner, v. STATES. Nos. 73—1766, 73—1834. Argued July 8, 1974. Decided 24, Syllabus Following indictment alleging violation federal statutes by certain staff members White House and political supporters President, Special Prosecutor filed a motion under Fed.Rule Crim.Proc. 17(c) for subpoena duces tecum production before trial tapes documents relating to precisely identified conversations meetings between others. The claiming executive privilege, quash subpoena. District Court, after treating subpoenaed material as presumptively privileged, concluded that had made sufficient showing rebut presumption requirements Rule been satisfied. court thereafter issued an order in camera examination material, having rejected President's contentions (a) dispute him was nonjusticiable 'intra-executive' conflict (b) judiciary lacked authority review assertion privilege. stayed its pending appellate review, which then sought Court Appeals. this petition writ certiorari judgment (No. 73—1766) cross-petition such challenging grand-jury action 73—1834) granted both petitions. Held: 1. Courts appealable 'final' 28 U.S.C. § 1291, therefore properly 'in' Appeals, 1254, when is now review. Although normally not final subject appeal, exception 'limited class cases where denial immediate would render impossible any whatsoever individual's claims.' States Ryan, 402 530, 533, 91 1580, 1582, 29 85. Such proper unique circumstances case it be inappropriate procedure securing resisting require proceed traditional contempt citation provide Pp. 690—692. 2. presents justiciable controversy. 692—697. mere 'intrabranch dispute,' without more, does defeat jurisdiction. ICC, 337 426, 69 1410, 93 L.Ed. 1451. P. 693. Attorney General regulation has conferred upon tenure represent given explicit power contest invocation privilege seeking evidence deemed relevant performance his specially delegated duties. While remains effect, Executive Branch bound it. ex rel. Accardi Shaughnessy, 347 260, 74 499, 98 681. 694 696. (c) within scope express specified preliminarily determined admissible criminal case, opposition thereto, present issues 'of type are traditionally justiciable,' supra, U.S., at 430, S.Ct., 1413, fact litigants officers bar justiciability. 696—697. 3. From Court's submitted support subpoena, much seal, clear comported with justify trial. 697—702. 4. Neither doctrine separation powers nor generalized need confidentiality high-level communications, can sustain absolute unqualified presidential immunity from judicial process all circumstances. See, e.g., Murbury Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 177, 2 60; Baker Carr, 369 186, 211, 82 691, 706, 7 663. Absent claim protect military, diplomatic, or sensitive national security secrets, communications significantly diminished producing protected conditions inspection, Art. II Constitution plainly function courts Constitution. 703 707. 5. will afford utmost deference acts function, Burr, 25 F.Cas. pp. 187, 190, 191—192 14,694), materials use based, here, on ground military diplomatic secrets implicated, but merely interest confidentiality, must yield demonstrated, specific fundamental demands due law fair administration justice. 707—713. 6. On basis record, cannot erred ordering shall forthwith transmitted Court. 713—714. 7. Since encompass vastly wider range than true ordinary individual, public requires afforded greatest protection consistent justice, heavy responsibility ensure involving irrelevant inadmissible prosecution accorded high degree respect returned seal lawful custodian. Until released no anyone. 714—716. No. 377 F.Supp. 1326, affirmed; 73—1834, dismissed improvidently granted. Leon Jaworski Philip A. Lacovara, Washington, D.C., States. James D. St. Clair, President. Mr. Chief Justice BURGER delivered opinion This litigation motion, behalf Mitchell (D.C.Crim. 74—110), third-party Columbia, pursuant 17(c). directed produce tape recordings aides advisers. claims lack jurisdiction, failure satisfy appealed We States' 73—1766),1 also 73—1834),2 because importance presented their prompt resolution 417 927 960, 2637 3162, 231 (1974). March 1, 1974, grand jury Columbia charging seven named individuals3 various offenses, including conspiracy defraud obstruct he designated indictment, among others, unindicted coconspirator.4 April 18, Prosecutor, see n. infra, returnable May 2, required production, advance September 9 date, tapes, memoranda, papers, transcripts other writings others.5 able fix time, place, persons these discussions daily logs appointment records him. 30, publicly edited 43 conversations; portions 20 were included. counsel, 'special appearance' accompanied formal At subsequent hearing,6 further motions expunge jury's naming coconspirator protective orders against disclosure information raised orally counsel 3 20, denied orders. 1326. It ordered 'the subordinate officer, official, employee custody control objects subpoenaed,' id., 1331 deliver 31, originals items, well index analysis those together copies 30. jurisdictional challenges based contention hence character; Judiciary court's rejection first challenge vested promulgated General; controversy presented. second held foreclosed decision Nixon Sirica, 159 U.S.App.D.C. 58, 487 F.2d 700 (1973). 4 judiciary, arbiter presumptive overcome Prosecutor's prima facie 'demonstration sufficiently compelling warrant chambers . ..' F.Supp., 1330. held, finally, satisfied condition p.m., 24. provided matters remain part record. 5 timely notice appeal order, certified record docketed Appeals Circuit. same day, mandamus order. 6 Later filed, judgment. expedited briefing schedule, 927, 2637, 231. June 6, 15, 1134, set argument * JURISDICTION 8 threshold question whether 1254. Appeals' jurisdiction 1291 encompasses only 'final decisions district courts.' procedural met, consideration if final. §§ 1254(1), 2101(e). finality requirement embodies strong congressional policy piecemeal reviews, obstructing impeding ongoing proceeding interlocutory appeals. Cobbledick 309 323, 324—326, 60 540, 541—542, 84 783 (1940). ordinarily promotes efficiency hastens ultimate termination litigation. In applying principle denying requiring tecum, repeatedly appealable. 532, 1581, 85 (1971); supra; Alexander 201 117, 26 356, 50 686 (1906). 10 'consistently necessity expedition justifies putting one who seeks resist desired choice compliance prior resistance concomitant possibility adjudication appeal.' 1582. 11 submitting contempt, however, some instances purposes underlying rule different result. For example, Perlman 247 7, 38 417, 62 950 (1918), third party requesting exhibits; appellant, owned exhibits, raise unlikely risk allow appellant's Id., 12—13, 419—420. That fell 12 Here too, avenue peculiarly setting arises. To place himself posture disobeying trigger mechanism ruling unseemly, unnecessary occasion constitutional confrontation two branches Government. Similarly, judge should placed issuing simply invoke issue cited could itself engender protracted litigation, delay merits sought. These considerations lead us conclude 1254; Gay Ruff, 292 25, 54 608, 610, 78 1099 (1934).7 JUSTICIABILITY 13 argued matter intra-branch superior officer resolution. renewed emphasis 'case' 'controversy' adjudicated courts. argues intrude into areas committed He views essentially 'jurisdictional' analogizes committees. exclusive discretion decide prosecute Confiscation Cases, Wall. 454, 19 196 (1869); Cox, 342 167, 171 (CA5), cert. sub nom. Cox Hauberg, 381 935, 1767, 14 (1965), contended determining what used case. concedes 'waived duty fall inherent refuse disclose officer.' Brief 42. demand items presents, view 663 (1962), since involves 'textually demonstrable' grant II. 'intra-branch never operated jurisdiction; justiciability depend surface inquiry. 1451 (1949), observed, 'courts look behind names symbolize parties determine presented.' 1413. See Powell McCormack, 395 486, 89 1944, 23 491 (1969); ICC Jersey City, 322 503, 64 1129, 88 1420 (1944); Chapman FPC, 345 153, 73 609, 97 918 (1953); Secretary Agriculture 645, 826, 1015 (1954); FMB Isbrandtsen Co., 356 481, 483 851, 853, 926 (1958); Marine Bancorporation Inc., 602, 2856, 978; Connecticut National Bank, 656, 2788, 1016. 15 Our starting point nature sought—here prosecution. laws brought name sovereign. Verger 295 78, 88, 55 629, 633, 79 1314 (1935). Under II, Congress conduct 516. appoint assist discharge 509, 510, 515, 533. Acting statutes, particular tenure.8 gives duties.9 Fed.Reg. 30739, amended 32805. 16 So long extant force law. 681 (1954), regulations discretionary Board Immigration exercise own appeals deportation cases. so General's remained operative, even though original reassert amending regulations. Service Dulles, 354 363, 388, 77 1152, 1165, 1403 (1957), Vitarelli Seaton, 359 535, 968, 1012 (1959), reaffirmed basic holding Accardi. 17 Here, Accardi, theoretically possible amend revoke defining authority. But done so.10 it, indeed sovereign composed three enforce Moreover, delegation officer: authorization removed 'consensus' eight leaders Congress. N. supra. 18 obvious sense, alone meet standards. means more disagreement conflict; rather kind resolve. nonproduction official authority; resisted preserve Whatever correct answer merits, justiciable.' independent asserted opposed steadfast material. assures there 'that concrete adverseness sharpens presentation largely depends illumination difficult questions'. 204, 703. arising regular course prosecution, III power. 198, 691. light uniqueness arises, viewed barrier inconsistent applicable regulation, facts standing bring decision. challenged failed 17(c), governs issuance subpoenas proceedings. If we sustained challenge, reach Thus turn have Arkansas Louisiana Gas Co. Dept. Public Utilities, 304 61, 64, 58 770, 771, 1149 (1938); Ashwander TVA, 297 288, 346—347, 56 466, 482—483, 80 688 (1936) (Brandeis, J., concurring). provides: 21 'A may command person whom books, therein. promptly modify supoena unreasonable oppressive. direct produced time they offered permit thereof inspected attorneys.' 22 A quashed 'unreasonable oppressive,' otherwise. leading interpreting standard Bowman Dairy 341 214, 71 675, 95 879 (1951). recognized characteristics cases: (1) intended discovery cases, 220, 675; (2) chief innovation expedite providing inspection materials,11 ibid. As agree, decided wake generally followed Judge Weinfeld's formulation Iozia, F.R.D. 335, 338 (SDNY 1952), showing. test, trial, moving show: evidentiary12 relevent; otherwise procurable reasonably diligence; (3) prepare obtain tend unreasonably trial; (4) application good faith general 'fishing expedition.' Against background, carry burden, hurdles: relevancy; admissibility; specificity. necessarily affords less comprehensive total situation available unwilling evaluation conclusion us, seal. Of course, contents stage described fully likelihood each contains offenses charged indictment. Gross, 24 138 1959). With many sworn testimony statements participants said time. remainder identity conversations, taken context, rational inference least relate preliminary most cogent objection admissibility taped here collection out-of-court declarants cross-examination hearsay. apparently contain defendants party. hearsay automatically defendant case.13 Declarations showing, evidence,14 delarant declarations furtherance conspiracy. coconspirators Dutton Evans, 400 74, 81, 210, 215, 27 213 (1970). Recorded limited purpose impeaching credibility testifies testifies. Generally, impeach witnesses insufficient Carter, 367, 371 (DC 1954). valid potential evidentiary uses transcription take significant period Accordingly, authorizing tecum. Enforcement pretrial sound often turns determination factual issues. Without arbitrariness finding support, disturb applicant complied Sue Chicago Transit Authority, 279 416, 419 (CA7 1960); Shotkin Nelson, 146 (CA10 1944). this, coordinate branch Government, particularly meticulous standards correctly applied. 34 14,692d) (CC Va.1807). our persuaded source, processing await shown. (1951); 335 (S.D.N.Y. 1952). IV THE CLAIM OF PRIVILEGE Having satisfied, 'confidential close advisors produce.' App. 48a. broad precludes prevail hold prevails over assigned duties Government initially interpret Constitution, interpretation great noted, reads Presidential communications. Many unequivocally Marbury Cranch, (1803), '(i)t emphatically province department say is.' 60. No defined specifically enforcement confidential exercises Legislative found invalid Youngstown, Sheet & Tube Sawyer, 343 579, 72 863, 96 1153 (1952). series interpreted provisions Members Senate Speech Debate Clause, U.S.Const. I, Doe McMillan, 412 306, 2018, 36 912 (1973); Gravel 408 606, 92 2614, 33 583 (1972); Brewster, 501, 2531, 507 Johnson, 383 169, 86 749, (1966). consistently exercised construe delineate powers, follow alleged derive enumerated powers. 30 system government 'requires manner variance construction document another branch.' 549, 1978. And stated: 31 '(D)eciding measure government, exceeds whatever committed, delicate interpretation, interpreter Constitution.' 32 Notwithstanding accord 'judicial Power III, shared Executive, share veto power, override veto. Any contrary concept checks balances flow scheme tripartite government. Federalist, 47, p. 313 (S. Mittell ed. 1938). reaffirm 'to is' Cranch. B urges grounds, common governments peculiar officials advise them manifold duties; too plain discussion. Human experience teaches expect dissemination remarks temper candor concern appearances interests detriment decisionmaking process.15 supremacy area Certain privileges powers;16 similar underpinnings. rests independence sphere, Humphrey's Executor 629—630, 869, 874—875, 1611 (1935); Kilbourn Thompson, 103 168, 190—191, (1881), insulates thereby protects 35 However, neither absolute, complete objectivity advisers calls solely broad, undifferentiated values find accept very important obliged provide. impediment way primary Judicial do justice prosecutions III. designing structure dividing allocating co-equal branches, Framers system, separate operate independence. 37 'While diffuses better secure liberty, contemplates practice integrate dispersed workable enjoins separateness interdependence, autonomy reciprocity.' Youngstown 635, 870 (Jackson, read essential nonmilitary nondiplomatic upset balance 'a government' gravely impair role C 39 legitimate needs outweigh necessary resolve competing preserves functions branch. right free according representations 191 192 14,694) (CCVa.1807). 40 expectation correspondence, like deliberations, privacy citizens and, added values, candid, objective, blunt harsh opinions decisionmaking. explore alternatives shaping policies making except privately. justifying operation inextricably rooted Constitution.17 (1973), 'presumptively privileged,' 75, F.2d, 717, position accepted agree Marshall's observation, therefore, '(i)n president individual.' F.Cas., 192. considered historic commitment nowhere profoundly manifest twofold aim (of justice) guilt escape innocence suffer.' Berger 633. elected employ adversary develop comprehensive. ends defeated judgments founded partial speculative facts. integrity confidence full facts, framework rules evidence. done, imperative compulsory needed either defense. 42 Only recently restated ancient proposition law, albeit context inquiry every man's evidence,' constitutional, common-law, statutory Bryan, 339 (323, 331, 70 724, 730 (1949)); Blackmer 284 421, 438 (52 252, 76 375) (1932). .' Branzburg Hayes, 665, (92 2646, 626) (1972). 44 referred designed weighty interests. Thus, Fifth Amendment provides man 'shall compelled witness himself.' And, generally, attorney priest revealed professional confidence. forced disclosure, established statute, origins, exceptions lightly created expansively construed, derogation search truth.18 45 served prosecution; diclosure secrets. shown responsibilities. C. S. Air Lines Waterman S.S. Corp., 333 103, 111, 68 431, 436, 568 (1948), dealing foreign considerations, said: 46 'The Commander-in-Chief Nation's organ affairs, intelligence services whose reports ought published world. intolerable courts, information, perhaps nullify actions secret.' 47 Reynolds, 528, 727 (1953), claimant's Tort Claims Act 48 'It court, reasonable danger compulsion expose which, security, divulged. When appropriate, jeopardize meant insisting evidence, alone, chambers.' 10. 49 extended confidentiality. Nowhere noted earlier, reference yet extent relates effective constitutionally based. similarly dimensions. Sixth explicitly confers confronted him' obtaining favor. guarantees deprived liberty vindicate guarantees, accomplish produced. 51 weigh responsibilities inroads justice.19 preserving entitled respect. moved infrequent occasions called prosecution.20 52 hand, allowance withhold demonstrably cut deeply guarantee acknowledged office nature, whereas central access totally frustrated. vitiated number bearing 53 asserting D earlier did err concludes injurious properly, return Upon receiving became treat privileged demonstrate 'essential (pending criminal) case.' Fed.Cas., treated proceeded presumption, unable inspection. Accordingly affirm court. conducting E petitions certiorari. Those disposed of, implementation rest '(T)he guard, furnished (the President) being harassed vexatious subpoenas, looked (district) issued; circumstance precede issued.' 34. Statements test relevance isolated; excised. subpoena; elementary always calling scrupulous release publication stage, probably situation, admissible, Marshall, sitting Burr extraordinarily careful out 57 statement mean sense above singularly activities, related Article. activities 'ordinary necessary21 idle associates casual might concerning country statesmen call treatment. doubt times suggested supra until burden applies greater excised material; once excise, restored status came during pendency essence, mandate forthwith. 59 Affirmed. REHNQUIST took 1254(1) 2101(e) 20. e.g. (1952); Mine Workers, 330 258, 67 677, 884 (1947); Carter Coal 298 238, 855, 1160 (1936); Rickert Rice Mills Fontenot, 110, 374, 513 Railroad Retirement Alton R. 330, 758, 1468 Norman Baltimore Ohio 294 240, 407, 885 73—1834 acted coconspirator. prevail, concerned 73—1766. 19, transmittal Action deferred oral denied. John Mitchell, H. Haldeman, Ehrlichman, Charles W. Colson, Robert Mardian, Kenneth Parkinson, Gordon Strachan. Each occupied Committee Re-election Colson entered guilty plea charge longer defendant. special appearance requested lift regarding individuals additional appropriate disclosures news media reasons continuance meaningful. 10, jointly unseal parts After defendants, 1974 1134. schedule attached 42a—46a. joint suggestion approval proceedings camera. grounds. appealable, vehicles available. authority, vests plenary investigations 'all 1972 Election deems assume responsibility, allegations staff, appointees, consents General.' particular, inter alia, 'Executive Privilege' handl(e) aspects jurisdiction.' 30739. go provide: 'In exercising accountability falling Department Justice. countermand interfere actions. inform consult about accordance assurances Constitutional effect limit hereby given, extraordinary improprieties consulting Majority Minority Leaders Chairmen ranking Committees Representatives ascertaining consensus proposed action.' understanding Bork, author establishing Committee: 'Although anticipated receive cooperation getting feels prosecutions, understood sides processes pursue develop.' Hearings 93d Cong., 1st Sess., pt. 450 Bork gave Subcommittee Criminal H.J.Res. 784 H.R. 10937 Judiciary, 266 confirmation hearings, William Saxbe testified Bork's Nomination B. agreed adopted remove 'gross impropriety.' 5—6, 8—10. There impropriety. quoted member advisory committee 'in advance, enabling (them) wants (them).' 220 5, 678. Manual Complex Multidistrict Litigation Federal Center recommends encouraged complex documentary offered. 150. faced unusual what, practical matter, party.' 1330 (D.C.1974). suggests Iozia apply vigor prosecutors. 128—129. lower exists refusal 'would surmount objections declarant himself, inferences' drawn. Matlock, 415 164, 172, 988, 994, 242 Lee 747, 757, 967, 973, 1270 McCormick, Evidence 270, 651—652 (2d 1972). substantial, conspiracy, enough jury. Vaught, 485 320, 323 (CA4 1973); Hoffa, 349 41—42 (CA6 1965), aff'd 385 293, 87 408, 374 (1966); Santos, 43, 1967), denied, 390 954, 1048, 1148 (1968); Morton, 573, 576 (CA8 Spanos, 462 1012, 1014 (CA9 1972); Carbo 314 718, 737 1963), 953, 1625, 1626, 1627, 498 (1964). Whether judge. nothing novel governmental Convention 1787 conducted privacy. Farrand, Records 1787, xi—xxv (1911). sealed years Convention. Stat. 475, 15th Res. (1818). Most acknowledge secrecy constitution developed written. Warren, Making 134—139 (1937). provision corresponding Clause. silence score dispositive. announced McCulloch Maryland, Wheat. 316, accompanying grant, universally applied suffices state it.' Marshall Gordon, 243 521, 537, 448, 451, 61 881 (1917). 'Freedom communication vital fulfillment aims wholesome relationships obtained removing specter disclosure. (G)overnment open channels talk quality functioning.' Carl Zeiss Stiftung V. E. Zeiss, Jena, 318, 325 1966). 71, 700, 713 Kaiser Aluminum Chem. Corp. 141 Ct.Cl. 38, 157 939 (1958) (Reed, J.); Because key process, historically cautious privileges. Frankfurter, dissenting Elkins 364 206, 234, 1437, 1454, 1669 (1960), this: 'Limitations permitting testify excluding transcending predominant utilizing truth.' civil address trials. Cardozo analogous speaking unanimous Clark 289 465, 993 (1933), emphasized maintaining deliberations petit debate stifled thought checked jurors feel arguments ballots freely world.' 13, 469. Nonetheless, isolated serve paramount vitiate secrecy: juror firmness fear speak mind confidences barred ears impertinence malice. shielded event reflecting honor. chance timid soul fears give repressive remote shadowy shape justice.' 16, 470. camera, questions arise excising parts, lies seek aid validity excisions, excision relevancy (1948).

Category: 0