|
|
Back to UserFriendly Strip Comments Index
| ATTN: SaylorA & kahuana |
by wabbit65 |
2022-02-24 03:23:36 |
RE: Executive Privilege
SaylorA: it is you who are missing a point here. The SCOTUS ruling made clear that the AUTHORITY to invoke Executive Privilege rests with the SITTING President, but it made NO ruling that Executive Privilege may ONLY be invoked by a sitting President on information from their OWN Administration. There is a difference between invoking privilege to cover information from a FORMER President, and a FORMER president invoking privilege. Because of this ruling, the first is still allowed, but the latter is not.
The practice of Presidents "keeping the secrets" of their predecessors was at best an unspoken tradition, but there was never any law requiring it. The same is true on Executive Orders. Those last only so long as they are not rescinded. A newly sworn in President, could, with a simple memo, revoke EVERY Executive Order.
kahuana: In the wake of Nixon's resignation SCOTUS did offer an opinion on whether or not Executive Privilege was perpetual. Their statement only said that a sitting President might (NOT MUST) give consideration to the opinion of a predecessor as to whether the privilege should be maintained. |
|
[ Reply ] |
|
Addendum | by wabbit65 | 2022-02-24 03:43:27 |
|
Probably the wrong TLP to continue this in, but... | by kahuana | 2022-02-24 09:09:44 |
|
Anybody here ever see Casablanca? | by mmell | 2022-02-24 09:59:10 |
|
OK, I missed that he was trying to claim | by SaylorA | 2022-02-24 21:19:40 |
|
|
[Todays Cartoon Discussion]
[News Index]
|
|
