- Nixon v. Fitzgerald
-
Nixon v. Fitzgerald
Supreme Court of the United StatesArgued November 30, 1981
Decided June 24, 1982Full case name Richard Nixon v. A. Ernest Fitzgerald Citations 457 U.S. 731 (more)
102 S. Ct. 2690; 73 L. Ed. 2d 349; 1982 U.S. LEXIS 42; 50 U.S.L.W. 4797Prior history Cert. to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit Holding The President is entitled to absolute immunity from liability for damages based on his official acts. Court membership Chief Justice
Warren E. BurgerAssociate Justices
William J. Brennan, Jr. · Byron White
Thurgood Marshall · Harry Blackmun
Lewis F. Powell, Jr. · William Rehnquist
John P. Stevens · Sandra Day O'ConnorCase opinions Majority Powell, joined by Burger, Rehnquist, Stevens, O'Connor Concurrence Burger Dissent White, joined by Brennan, Marshall, Blackmun Dissent Blackmun, joined by Brennan, Marshall Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 731 (1982),[1] was a Supreme Court of the United States court case that dealt with immunity from suit to government officials performing discretionary functions when their action did not violate clearly established law.
Contents
Background
A. Ernest Fitzgerald filed a law suit against government officials claiming that he lost his position as a contractor with the United States Air Force because of testimony made before Congress in the 1970s. Among the people listed in the law suit was former President Richard Nixon. Nixon argued that a President cannot be sued for actions taken while in office. The trial and appellate court rejected the President's claim of immunity and the case went to the Supreme Court.
Opinion
In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that the President is entitled to absolute immunity from liability for civil damages based on his official acts. The Court emphasized that the President is not immune from criminal charges stemming from his official (or unofficial) acts while in office.
The Court noted that a grant of absolute immunity to the President would not leave the President with unfettered power. The Court stated that there were formal and informal checks on presidential action that did not apply with equal force to other executive officials. The Court observed that the President was subjected to constant scrutiny by the press. It noted that vigilant oversight by Congress would also serve to deter presidential abuses of office, as well as to make credible the threat of impeachment. The court determined that other incentives to avoid misconduct existed, including a desire to earn reelection, the need to maintain prestige as an element of presidential influence, and a President's traditional concern for his historical stature.
This decision was clarified by Clinton v. Jones, in which the Court held that a President is subject to civil suits for actions committed before assuming the presidency.
See also
References
External links
- Text of Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 731 (1982) is available from: · Findlaw · Cornell LII
Categories:- Richard Nixon
- United States Supreme Court cases
- United States Constitution Article Two case law
- United States separation of powers case law
- 1982 in United States case law
Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.