What was the primary outcome of the U.S. vs. Nixon case?

The primary outcome of the U.S. vs. Nixon case was that the President must comply with subpoenas. This landmark Supreme Court decision established the principle that no person, not even the President of the United States, is above the law. The ruling emphasized the importance of the judicial process and upheld the authority of the courts to enforce subpoenas, thereby ensuring that relevant evidence could not be withheld in a criminal investigation, even by the highest office in the land.

The significance of this ruling lies in its reaffirmation of the checks and balances inherent in the U.S. government. It underscored the idea that executive privilege cannot be used to obstruct justice for criminal matters. This decision helped to reinforce accountability in government and has had lasting implications for the relationship between the executive branch and the judicial branch.

In contrast, other options misrepresent legal principles. The idea that the President cannot be impeached is inaccurate; the Constitution provides for impeachment by Congress. The belief that a President can withhold evidence during investigations contradicts the ruling of this case. Lastly, the notion that the President has absolute immunity from prosecution is incorrect, as the Court clarified that actions taken while in office can be subject to judicial scrutiny. This case is a foundational moment in establishing the rule