R. H. Clark


RAOUL BERGER HAS ONCE AGAIN placed within a solidly professional framework an issue of considerable public interest and debate. As was the case with impeachment,' Berger's scholarly study on executive privilege brings to the controversy surrounding the issue a much needed analytical construct and massing of evidence which can only result in a greater level of general understanding. Although it is not accurate to suggest that Berger is neutral on the topic, since he published a significant study as far back as 1965 attacking the concept, 2 his method of massing every conceivable argument and piece of evidence on both sides of the issue makes this work the most valuable treatment of executive privilege available. As was the case with his previous volumes, the framework of analysis employed by Berger stresses extensive historical study of both English and American sources. This, in turn, is combined with an effective and detailed dissection of 'the legal bases for presidential power and with a complete examination of the origins, growth and dimensions of executive privilege. While this reviewer disagrees with the central position that Berger asserts, namely that executive privilege is a myth, this disagreement in no way should be interpreted as seeking to deride this monument to scholarly research and analysis that Berger has produced.