Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 731 (1982)
Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 731 (1982)
Annotation
Primary Holding
The President has absolute immunity from liability for civil damages arising from
any official action taken while in office.
Facts
Fitzgerald testified to Congress that the Air Force was experiencing severe cost
overruns and technical difficulties regarding the development of a transport plane.
He worked for the Air Force as a management analyst but was fired during a
departmental reorganization and reduction in force under the presidency of
Richard M. Nixon. He brought a claim for damages, with Nixon named as a
defendant, arguing that he had been fired and his position removed as retaliation
for testifying before Congress. Nixon raised the defense of absolute presidential
immunity, which was rejected by the trial court but accepted by the appellate court,
which dismissed the case.
Opinions
Majority
Concurrence
Concurrence
Dissent
Case Commentary
As long as there are remedies such as impeachment and intervention by Congress,
the President can be held sufficiently accountable for actions in office that absolute
immunity is reasonable. He must be permitted to carry out his official duties
without being concerned about liability for civil damages.
Read more
Case
No. 79-1738
Syllabus
Held:
1. This Court has jurisdiction to determine the immunity question. Pp. 457 U. S. 741-
744.
(a) The case was "in" the Court of Appeals for purposes of 28 U.S.C. 1254, which
authorizes this Court's review of "[c]ases in" the courts of appeals. The Court of
Appeals here dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. However, petitioner's
appeal to the Court of Appeals falls within the "collateral order" doctrine of Cohen v.
Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp., 337 U. S. 541, as raising a "serious and unsettled
question" of law. Although the Court of Appeals had previously ruled in another
case that the President was not entitled to absolute immunity, this Court had never
so held. Pp. 457 U. S. 741-743.
(b) Nor was the controversy mooted by an agreement to liquidate damages entered
into between the parties after the petition for certiorari was filed and respondent
had entered his opposition. Under the terms of the agreement, petitioner paid
respondent $142,000; respondent agreed to accept liquidated damages of $28,000
if this Court ruled that petitioner was not entitled to absolute immunity; and no
further payments would be made if the decision upheld petitioner's immunity
claim. The limited agreement left both parties with a considerable financial stake in
the resolution of the question presented in this Court. Cf. Havens Realty Corp. v.
Coleman, 455 U. S. 363. Pp. 457 U. S. 743-744.
(a) Although there is no blanket recognition of absolute immunity for all federal
executive officials from liability for civil damages resulting from constitutional
violations, certain officials -- such as judges and prosecutors -- because of the
special nature of their responsibilities, require absolute exemption from liability. Cf.
Butz v. Economou, 438 U. S. 478. Determination of the immunity of particular
officials is guided by the Constitution, federal statutes, history, and public policy.
Pp. 457 U. S. 744-748.
(c) The President's absolute immunity extends to all acts within the "outer
perimeter" of his duties of office. Pp. 457 U. S. 755-757.
(d) A rule of absolute immunity for the President does not leave the Nation without
sufficient protection against his misconduct. There remains the constitutional
remedy of impeachment, as well as the deterrent effects of constant scrutiny by the
press and vigilant oversight by Congress. Other incentives to avoid misconduct may
include a desire to
POWELL, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which BURGER, C.J., and
REHNQUIST, STEVENS, and O'CONNOR, JJ., joined. BURGER, C.J., filed a concurring
opinion,post, p. 457 U. S. 758. WHITE, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which
BRENNAN, MARSHALL, and BLACKMUN, JJ., joined, post, p. 457 U. S. 764.
BLACKMUN, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which BRENNAN and MARSHALL, JJ.,
joined, post, p. 457 U. S. 797.
Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the
United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational
purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or
settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy,
completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information
linked to from this site. Please check official sources.
Justia Annotations is a forum for attorneys to summarize, comment on, and analyze
case law published on our site. Justia makes no guarantees or warranties that the
annotations are accurate or reflect the current state of law, and no annotation is
intended to be, nor should it be construed as, legal advice. Contacting Justia or any
attorney through this site, via web form, email, or otherwise, does not create an
attorney-client relationship.
Receive free daily summaries of US Supreme Court opinions.
Email *
Subscribe
First Party
Nixon
Second Party
Fitzgerald
Official Citation
Argued
Decided
Google Scholar
Google Books
Legal Blogs
Google Web
Bing Web
Google News
Google News Archive
Yahoo! News