For over 200 years, Congress and the President have locked horns on an issue that will not, and cannot go away: legislative access to executive branch information. Presidents and their advisers often claim that the sought-for information is covered by the doctrine of executive privilege and other principles that protect confidentiality among presidential advisers. For its part, Congress will articulate persuasive reasons why legislative access is crucial. In terms of constitutional principles, these battles are largely a standoff, and court decisions in this area are interesting but hardly dispositive. What usually breaks the deadlock is a political decision: the determination of lawmakers to use the coercive tools available to them, and political calculations by the executive branch whether a continued standoff risks heavy and intolerable losses for the President. Many useful and thoughtful standards have been developed to provide guidance for executive-legislative disputes over access to information. Those standards, constructive as they are, are set aside at times to achieve what both branches may decide has higher importance; settling differences and moving on. Legal and constitutional principles, finely-honed as they might be, are often overridden by the politics of the moment and practical considerations. Efforts to discover enduring and enforceable norms in this area invariably fall short. Efforts to resolve interbranch disputes on purely legal grounds may have to give ground in the face of superior political muscle by a Congress determined to exercise the many coercive tools available to it. By the same token, a Congress that is internally divided or uncertain about its institutional powers, or unwilling to grind it out until the documents are delivered, will lose out in a quest for information. Moreover, both branches are at the mercy of political developments that can come around the corner without warning and tilt the advantage decisively to one side. It is tempting to see the executive-legislative clashes only as a confrontation between two branches, yielding a winner and a loser. It is more than that. Congressional access represents part of the framers' belief in representative government. When lawmakers are unable (or unwilling) to obtain executive branch information needed for congressional deliberations, the loss extends to the public, democracy, and constitutional government. The system of checks and balances and separation of powers are essential to protect individual rights and liberties. This book is also available in paper binding. "[T]ightly reasoned, nuanced, and thoroughly researched." -- Athan Theoharis, Marquette University Political Science Quarterly

This book provides an in-depth history and analysis of executive privilege from President Nixon to President Obama, and its relation to the proper scope and limits of presidential power.

Drawing on White House and congressional documents as well as on personal interviews, Mark Rozell provides both a historical overview of executive privilege and an explanation of its importance in the political process. He argues for a return to a pre-Watergate understanding of the role of executive privilege.

Mark Rozell's Executive Privilege has provided for the past decade an in-depth review of the historical exercise of executive privilege and an analysis of the proper scope and limits of presidential power. Now Rozell has updated this important work to cover two new presidents, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, and show how both have revived the national debate over executive privilege. Book jacket.

Demonstrates that the presidential claim of authority to withhold information is without historical or constitutional foundation.

Tells the story behind the development of the Freedom of Information Act and explores its legacy today The Freedom of Information Act, developed at the height of the Cold War, highlighted the power struggles between Congress and the president in that tumultuous era. By drawing on previously unseen primary source material and exhaustive archival research, this book reveals the largely untold and fascinating narrative of the development of the FOIA, and demonstrates how this single policy issue transformed presidential behaviour. The author explores the policy's lasting influence on the politics surrounding contemporary debates on government secrecy, public records and the public's 'right to know', and examines the modern development and use of 'executive privilege'.

As Congress and the president battle out the federal deficit, foreign involvements, health care, and other policies of grave national import, the underlying constitutional issue is always the separation of powers doctrine. In The Politics of Shared Power, a classic text in the field of executive-legislative relations, Louis Fisher explains clearly and perceptively the points at which congressional and presidential interests converge and diverge, the institutional patterns that persist from one administration and one Congress to another, and the partisan dimensions resulting from the two-party system. Fisher also discusses the role of the courts in reviewing cases brought to them by members of Congress, the president, agency heads, and political activists, illustrating how court decisions affect the allocation of federal funds and the development and implementation of public policy. He examines how the president participates as legislator and how Congress intervenes in administrative matters. Separate chapters on the bureaucracy, the independent regulatory commissions, and the budgetary process probe these questions from different angles. The new fourth edition addresses the line item veto and its tortuous history and prospects. A chapter on war powers and foreign affairs studies executive-legislative disputes that affect global relations, including the Iran-Contra affair, the Persian Gulf War in 1991, and American presence in conflicts such as Haiti and Bosnia. An important new discussion focuses on interbranch collisions and gridlock as they have developed since 1992.