
today's posted documents
- Asian Pacific Americans in the United States Congress -- Click to view this document
- Congressional Liaison Offices of Selected Federal Agencies -- Click to view this document
- House Committee Party Ratios: 98th-113th Congresses -- Click to view this document
- Financial Market Supervision: Canada's Perspective -- Click to view this document
- Sage Grouse and the Endangered Species Act (ESA) -- Click to view this document
- Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Discrimination in Employment: A Legal Analysis of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) -- Click to view this document
- The Workforce Investment Act and the One-Stop Delivery System -- Click to view this document
- EPA Regulations: Too Much, Too Little, or On Track? -- Click to view this document
- Keystone XL Pipeline Project: Key Issues -- Click to view this document
- Central America Regional Security Initiative: Background and Policy Issues for Congress -- Click to view this document
- State Taxation of Internet Transactions -- Click to view this document
- Federal Assistance for Wildfire Response and Recovery -- Click to view this document
- The U.S. Export Control System and the President's Reform Initiative -- Click to view this document
Find documents
Congressional Investigations of the Department of Justice, 1920-2012: History, Law, and Practice
A review of the historical experience pertinent to congressional access to information regarding the law enforcement activities of the Department of Justice indicates that the vast majority of requests for materials are resolved through political negotiation and accommodation, without the need for judicial resolution. Absent an executive privilege claim or a statute barring disclosure there appears to be no court precedent imposing a threshold burden on committees to demonstrate a "substantial reason to believe wrongdoing occurred" in order to obtain information. Instead, an inquiring committee need only show that the information sought is within the broad subject matter of its authorized jurisdiction, is in aid of a legitimate legislative function, and is pertinent to the area of concern. In the last 85 years, Congress has consistently sought and obtained access to information concerning prosecutorial misconduct by Department of Justice officials in closed cases; and access to pre-decisional deliberative prosecutorial memoranda-while often resisted by the Department-is usually released upon committee insistence as well. In contrast, the Department rarely releases-and committees rarely subpoena-material relevant to open criminal investigations. Typically, disputes are resolved without recourse to an executive privilege claim. Instead, negotiations produce various compromises: narrowing informational requests, delaying the release of information that could have prejudicial consequences on prosecutions, or redacting sensitive materials. However, when Presidents do claim executive privilege, courts have been reluctant to resolve the dispute. Indeed, litigation over the scope of executive privilege in direct relation to congressional oversight and investigations has been quite limited. In total, there have been four cases dealing with executive privilege in the context of information access disputes between Congress and the executive, and two of those resulted in decisions on the merits. The Supreme Court has never addressed executive privilege in the face of a congressional demand for information.
This package includes following files:
| # | File Name | Document Date | Order ID: | Number of Pages | Price | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
R42811.pdf
|
Nov 05, 2012 | R42811 | 49 | $29.95 | Add to Cart |
Older Versions:


R42811.pdf