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

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.

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.

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.

Americans of late have taken to waving the Constitution in the air and proclaiming, "The founders were on MY side! See, it's all right here!" But these phantom constitutions bear little relation to the historical one. By entering the world of the Constitution's framers, and experiencing it one day after the next as they did, Ray Raphael helps us understand how and why they created the document they did. Casting aside preconceptions and commonly held beliefs, he asks provocative questions that get to the heart of the document and its purposes: Was the aim of the Constitution really to limit government? Why didn't the framers include a Bill of Rights? Did they hate taxes? Was James Madison actually the "Father of the Constitution," as proclaimed in our textbooks? Can we find the true meaning of the Constitution by reading The Federalist Papers or by revealing the framers' "original intent"? The answers to these questions are bound to surprise and enlighten. Before we can consider what the framers would do if they were alive today, we first need to see what they did during their own time, not in our terms, but theirs. Only then can we begin to resolve the sweeping question that affects us all: what does the Constitution, written at a different time, mean for us today? With this meticulously researched historical tour de force, Raphael sets the record straight—and sounds a vital call for a reasoned and evidence-driven debate about our founding document.

Contents: (1) Introduction: The Watergate Cases; Post-Watergate Cases; Executive Branch Positions on the Scope of Executive Privilege: Reagan Through George W. Bush; Implications and Potential Impact of the Espy and Judicial Watch Rulings for Future Executive Privilege Disputes; Recent Developments: George W. Bush Claims of Executive Privilege ; (2) Concluding Observations; (3) Appendix: Presidential Claims of Executive Privilege From the Kennedy Administration Through the George W. Bush Administration: 1. Kennedy; 2. Johnson; 3. Nixon; 4. Ford and Carter; 6. George H. W. Bush; 7. Clinton; 8. George W. Bush.

“I have an Article II,” Donald Trump has announced, citing the US Constitution, “where I have the right to do whatever I want as president.” Though this statement would have come as a shock to the framers of the Constitution, it fairly sums up the essence of “the unitary executive theory.” This theory, which emerged during the Reagan administration and gathered strength with every subsequent presidency, counters the system of checks and balances that constrains a president’s executive impulses. It also, the authors of this book contend, counters the letter and spirit of the Constitution. In their account of the rise of unitary executive theory over the last several decades, the authors refute the notion that this overweening view of executive power has been a common feature of the presidency from the beginning of the Republic. Rather, they show, it was invented under the Reagan Administration, got a boost during the George W. Bush administration, and has found its logical extension in the Trump administration. This critique of the unitary executive theory reveals it as a misguided model for understanding presidential powers. While its adherents argue that greater presidential power makes government more efficient, the results have shown otherwise. Dismantling the myth that presidents enjoy unchecked plenary powers, the authors advocate for principles of separation of powers—of checks and balances—that honor the Constitution and support the republican government its framers envisioned. A much-needed primer on presidential power, from the nation’s founding through Donald Trump’s impeachment, The Unitary Executive Theory: A Danger to Constitutional Government makes a robust and persuasive case for a return to our constitutional limits.