This note analyzes the District Court of the District of Columbia’s application of the doctrine of executive privilege in In re Grand Jury Proceedings. Part II provides a brief history of executive privilege and discusses precedents that impacted the court’s decision. Part III indicates the procedural posture of the case and sets forth the substantive facts. Part IV discusses the court’s analysis of the executive privilege issue in light of recent District of Columbia Circuit Court decisions. Part V concludes that In re Grand Jury Proceedings bolstered the notion of a presumption in favor of the privilege, while observing that the sufficiency of the evidence presented to overcome the privilege must be evaluated in retrospect.
Popson, James M.
"In re: Grand Jury Proceedings: The Semantics of "Presumption" and "Need","
Akron Law Review: Vol. 32
, Article 3.
Available at: https://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akronlawreview/vol32/iss1/3