Want this question answered?
Invoking the inherent power of executive privilege.
Imagine if the Police Commissioners (members of the executive) were also judges (members of the judiciary). This would mean they could arrest anyone and then convict them automatically, thus exercising arbitrary power. By keeping the executive and the judiciary separate, we limit the possibility of arbitrary use of power.
It is more of a privilege than an absolute power because of the checks and balances in the government. (Checks and balances is were different branches of the government [executive, judicial, legislative] have to go through each other to get things done within the government) -Sprat
Imagine if the Police Commissioners (members of the executive) were also judges (members of the judiciary). This would mean they could arrest anyone and then convict them automatically, thus exercising arbitrary power. By keeping the executive and the judiciary separate, we limit the possibility of arbitrary use of power.
executive privilege. Executive Privilege is not an unlimited right to refuse. It extends only to those topics or areas which are critical for the President to retain privacy in order to accomplish his role as Executive. As such, it was possible for Congress to compel Bill Clinton to testify regarding the Whitewater affair.
No, this is an internet myth. The president has used Executive Privilege once since he took office, and that instance had nothing to do with amending any laws. The president's two immediate predecessors used Executive Privilege far more frequently: President Bush invoked the power six times and President Clinton used it 14 times.
Because it gives the President powers to, among other things, hide information and pardon prisoners. This gives the Executive powers exceeding constitutional authority. Executive Privilege was extremely controversial when, during the Watergate proceedings, Nixon tried to use it to justify his actions.Furthermore, it gives the president the ability to hide information from the people, which can be viewed as unconstitutional. However, Executive Privilege itself tends to be less controversial than its use."Executive privilege" is controversial because it is unconstitutional. However, the power of the President to pardon prisoners is constitutional.
Because it gives the President powers to, among other things, hide information and pardon prisoners. This gives the Executive powers exceeding constitutional authority. Executive Privilege was extremely controversial when, during the Watergate proceedings, Nixon tried to use it to justify his actions.Furthermore, it gives the president the ability to hide information from the people, which can be viewed as unconstitutional. However, Executive Privilege itself tends to be less controversial than its use."Executive privilege" is controversial because it is unconstitutional. However, the power of the President to pardon prisoners is constitutional.
it isnt..its an impliedd power of teh President which is normally meant for national affairs
"executive privilege" may be the phrase you want.
Other branches can stop things that congress wants to happen by using the powers that certain branch has.
Executive privilege is the legal doctrine that allows the President or other high-ranking government officials to withhold information from Congress or the courts in order to protect the confidentiality of certain conversations or documents. It is based on the separation of powers principle and is derived from the President's inherent authority to conduct the business of the executive branch. Executive privilege is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, but has been recognized by the courts as part of the President's constitutional powers.