Talk:United States v. Nixon

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

U.S. Supreme Court cases High‑importance

	This article is part of WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases, a collaborative effort to improve articles related to Supreme Court cases and the Supreme Court. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.U.S. Supreme Court casesWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court casesTemplate:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court casesU.S. Supreme Court articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Law Mid‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Early comments

This page reads as if everyone should automatically know the background to this, and what Nixon did, or even who he was. It was 30 years ago, so do you think a short, explanatory preamble, would help? Moriori 01:28, Dec 6, 2003 (UTC)

What the heck? It's been two years and this article is still a piece of crap? There's no background, no supreme court infobox, NOTHING on this page. I'm adding cleanup tag to this Hbdragon88 04:37, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The info box is a good step. However, in apparent response to these two notes, the following was added:
During the 1972 presidential campaign between Republican incumbent Richard Nixon and Democratic challenger George McGovern (D-South Dakota), in what became known as the Watergate Scandal, a group of burglers broke into the Democratic headquarters in the Watergate Hotel in Washington, D.C. Investigations into the break-in turned up evidence that implicated several officials of the Nixon administration, and possibly even President Nixon himself, in the orchestration of the crime and the subsequent coverup. Nixon was pressured to appoint a special prosecutor to look into the charges. When the appointed prosecutor, Archibald Cox, filed a subpoena requesting evidence - several audiotapes thought to contain incriminating conversations recorded in the Oval Office - from Nixon, the president refused and fired Cox. The next special prosecutor, Leon Jaworski, obtained a subpoena in April of 1974 ordering Nixon again to release the Watergate tapes. Hoping to satisfy the public, Nixon turned over edited transcripts of some of the conversations requested by the subpoena.

However, Nixon still refused to relinquish the tapes in their entirety, claiming that executive privilege protected the communications in question. Chief Justice Warren E. Burger denied Nixon's claims of executive privilege in the absence of "a claim of need to protect military, diplomatic, or sensitive national security secrets." The Supreme Court ruled 8-0 that the president's executive privilege was not absolute and, therefore, that the tapes must be released in their entirety.

Nixon finally consented and turned over the sixty-four tapes.

Whatever the two notes above may have been seeking, this added material may be suitable to a free-standing article on the case, but not to a hyper-lk'd encyclopedia article. If there is anything in there not covered by Watergate scandal, it should be extracted and added to that article but not this one. I've replaced it in this article with material that says about Watergate only what is needed to grasp this topic; users wanting more information than that on Watergate or Nixon can and should refer to their articles.
--Jerzy•[[User talk:Jerzy|t]] 08:00, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Edited

On 11/7/05 I did my best to clean p this page. I added some more details, background info, etc. Hope that helps. It still might need a little work. yes it does

ACLU

Why is this in the CLU category? Rich Farmbrough 19:45 29 November 2006 (UTC).

Links in preference to inline definitions

The article explains what a subpoena is, what "quash" means in a legal context, etc. This should be done with wikilinks to the appropriate articles, not with definitions in this article. I've made corresponding changes to the article. Dr. Sunglasses 02:56, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why did Rehnquist recuse himself?

Is it known why Rehnquist recused himself? Should be in the article if known. Tempshill (talk) 22:08, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a note and citation on this to the article. NW (Talk) ^{(How am I doing?)} 01:29, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Donald Trump

This case is getting a lot of legwork lately. US v. Nixon has been repeatedly cited by prosecutors in all of Trump's legal troubles, as well as by judges. One recent example is the judge from the Jan 6. trial ruling Trump had no presidential immunity. Worth including on this article? Delukiel (talk) 22:28, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]