Snipped from AlterNet.org.

Every time I hear the President invoke ‘Executive Privilege’, it infuriates me that he considers himself above the law. What gives him the right to not comply with subpoenas like everyone else? That being the case, I got to wondering how this ‘Executive Privilege’ thing ever came about. So, when I came across an article that finally puts the whole issue to rest with an informative explanation of what it is and where it came from, I thought I would post it on our site. You may be surprised that this handy little legal tactic is not even a part of our Constitution. Matter of fact, it was one of our more contemporary Presidents who first coined the term.

It was former President Dwight Eisenhower who coined the phrase ‘Executive Privilege’. However, he was not the first to invoke its principle. What it actually means is that “a president has the right to withhold certain information from Congress, the courts or anyone else — even when faced with a subpoena”. But, as spelled out in the alternet.org article, it is a bit more shaded in gray than black and white. In actuality, it is a “constitutional myth” that keeps popping its head up from time to time. It’s argued in the courts and ends up yielding conflicting decisions. However, most of the time it has been invoked, the presiding President has lost.

Even as early as George Washington’s time, it was invoked to avoid turning over papers that revealed information about a disastrous expedition against the American Indian tribes along the Ohio River. He lost his fight and ultimately turned over the papers. However, there have been challenges since. There was President Eisenhower who was successful in his fight in keeping officials from his administration from testifying. President Nixon used it to keep his infamous ‘tapes’ from being turned over in a criminal investigation. Nixon lost his battle and ultimately resigned. Then there was President Clinton who lost in the courts and his aides were forced to testify. So, it appears that it depends on who is sitting on the bench in our Supreme Court as to whether it is allowed or not.

Here is a portion of the article that refers to the present battle with George W. Bush.

Could this current case — involving requests for documents from Bush administration officials — end up in the courts?

It’s possible, but not likely, legal experts say. Neither side wants to get mired in a protracted legal battle, so the prospect of a negotiated solution is more likely. Since 1975, 10 senior administration officials have been called to testify before Congress, but the disputes were all resolved before getting to court. No president has mounted a court fight to keep his aides from testifying on Capitol Hill.

If you would like to read the full article click the image below.