Closing

In essence This court case ruled nixon Guilty of all charges brought to this court. That being said He resigned before being forced out of office only to later be pardoned by another president however the ruling though very final is Agenst Nixon. Us Victory over monster crime.

Personal Oppion

Under all consideration this case was normaly settled in normal courts however ever with this being said Nixons actions warned of fearther problems and needed to be resolved. Despite the fact he did lie in court, he did steal from the people, accept bribes, give bribes, and use Consperisy ,as well as doctored evidence. These are all cases settled in fediral or State courts , his actions however as president were shameful and to prevent him from being pardoned of crimes and allowing his actions to continue he has to be forced out of office, that being said the only way to remove him from office before this happend was to take it to supreme court where the Supreme justice, House, And Senite has to be present and actions accountable as well as MASS majority vote to remove him from his seat of power OR force a resignation. This in terms littlaly amonst the torts and crimes made him eligable to have such a case brought amonst the highest court in the United States.

Rule of law

the only rule of presidence I know of that was used was Mistretta v. United States, 488 U.S. 361 (1989) and Morrison v. Olson, 487 U.S. 654 (1988) Under these though he cound't do a dange thing. These cases do not advance his argument, however, since neither addressed the issue of justiciability. More importantly, neither case involved a situation in which judicial review would remove the only check placed on the Judicial Branch by the Framers.

Reasoning of the court

Under the conditions met by the Founders and the Idealisuim of the state the only way to prevent the crime from going unpunished was to impeach the president from office under the reasoning that he refused to give up his position .

" Because Nixon refused to resign from his office as a United States District Judge, he continued to collect his judicial salary while serving out his prison sentence. See H. R. Rep. No. 101-36, p. 13 (1989)."

This in turn lead the Supreme court to beleive that he himself would pardon his own crimes reather then allow him self to face punishment founded by the people for crimes such as lying under oath, Conspirisy, Bribery, accepting Bribes, along with multi. other crimes. in this reasoning and understanding the courts confrounted the issue the only way possible and to strip the powers of the guilty before he was allowed to use them to once again commit crimes or worse yet steal from the people of the united states due to refusal to leave position.

Decision of the court

ON all accounts despite the constant return of ideals by President Nixon, the Court Ruled guilty on all counts and for crimes agenst the State was their by Empeached from his role as President and the Executive branch. The word "try," both in 1787 and later, has considerably broader meanings than those to which petitioner would limit it. Older dictionaries define try as "[t]o examine" or "[t]o examine as a judge." and under this condition President Nixon was to be "Try" under the court rule. Also due to preventions found with in the Documents of old Petitioner also contends that the word "sole" should not bear on the question of justiciability because Art. II, §2, cl. 1, of the Constitution grants the President pardon authority "except in Cases of Impeachment." There for preventing President Nixon from simply leaving the court grounds of his own will clear of charges brought about by his crimes. The exception from the President's pardon authority of cases of impeachment was a separate determination by the Framers that executive clemency should not be available in such cases. This had prevented the Pardon of President Nixon apon him self which as resently been seen done by President Bush jr. who would of been charged with War Crimes appon leaving office.

Issue of the case

Under the right of Impeachment brought about by the founding fathers in the articles, provides the House and the Senate the right to strip the powers of the executive branch.

"Nixon, a former Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi, was convicted by a jury of two counts of making false statements before a federal grand jury and sentenced to prison."

This in itself was one of many charges including "The grand jury investigation stemmed from reports that Nixon had accepted a gratuity from a Mississippi businessman in exchange for asking a local district attorney to halt the prosecution of the businessman's son".

Nixon had accepted Bribery, provoked bribes, Lied under Oath, Had taken part in conspiracy, and once more refused to resign from his position and continued to receive payment DESPITE being imprisoned for several crimes.This gave turn to “the Senate voted to invoke its own Impeachment Rule XI, under which the presiding officer appoints a committee of Senators to "receive evidence and take testimony." Senate Impeachment Rule XI, reprinted in Senate Manual, S. Doc. No. 101-1, 101st Cong., 1st ".

In essence Nixon himself had slandered and battered the cases and gone beyond the limitations of the executive branch thus allowing him to receive privileges that should have been striped. By Impeaching the president from office and removing his rights he would no longer be able to pardon his Crimes or use the system to his will based sole on position. The evidence to itself proved Nixon’s guild and was strong enough to set upon the Supreme Courts door where the Chef Justice MUST be present to allow the Impeachment process to go through. Without the Chef Justice available to be at the assemble where Nixon was to be Try, the Impeachment would be null and void and the Senate would lose the case regardless of prosecution.

Facts of the case

President Nixon authorized an attack on Cambodia, where 4 students were killed in the incident. He and his colleges were then put into a conspiracy to with hold information to prevent this from becoming public and to prevent their trails and prosecutions. That being said burglars who had come to rob had stumbled upon the information and were forced to silence and all tapes with held. Due to this the court challenged the president’s ability to with hold tapes from the courts simply because of statues. The courts found it un-reasonable and forced the forwarding of the tapes, their by making the president release his hidden evidence to the courts.