2. A crucial ruling concerning limitations of executive privilege and presidential immunity, Nixon v. United States directly resulted in the sole resignation by an American President
Following the Watergate scandal, the second special prosecutor investigating the saga, Leon Jaworski, subpoenaed President Nixon in pursuit of a selection of tapes and papers concerning meetings between the president and individuals indicted by a grand jury. Submitting edited transcripts of forty-three conversations, Nixon subsequently instructed his attorney, James St. Clair, to kill the subpoena. However, arguing before the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, St. Clair’s assertion the president “is as powerful as a monarch…and is not subject to the processes of any court in the land except the court of impeachment” was emphatically rejected.
Ordered to surrender the tapes in full, Nixon appealed to the Supreme Court. Arguing the issue was political and not judicial, Nixon also employed a sweeping claim of executive privilege to assert protections over the tapes. Issuing a unanimous decision less than three weeks after hearing arguments, the Supreme Court found the subpoena was valid and proper due to the “sufficient likelihood” of criminal contents. Most vitally, the court declared that although presidential privilege did exist, Nixon’s claims of an “absolute, unqualified Presidential privilege of immunity” was false. Ordering delivery of the tapes to the District Court, Nixon resigned sixteen days later.