Supreme Court Exercise

In January of 1997 , the standing president , William Jefferson Clinton sued a woman named Paula Corbin Jones . Jones had claimed that the president , while governor , had made unwanted , indeed , abhorrent sexual advances toward her and that her refusal to comply with Clinton 's wishes had resulted in hardship at work for her (USSC , 1997 . Jones claimed she had been working at the front desk of a hotel with another woman , when Clinton arrived for a visit . She and a co-worker had chatted with Clinton 's bodyguard for a few moments . Clinton , observing the

br conversation , remarked to his bodyguard that Jones had a come hither look , and he instructed Ferguson to bring Jones up to talk to him . Jones testified that she had joined Clinton in his room , hoping for a job promotion . Clinton instead made sexual advances toward her , which she repeatedly refused . Jones claimed that Clinton had then told her to be smart and not make trouble , because he knew her boss (AP , 1998

Clinton , rather than responding to these charges , d a motion to dismiss the charges , citing presidential immunity . Clinton 's lawyer Robert Bennett claimed that Jones would not lose any rights if her claim was postponed , and that , indeed , she might earn interest on any damages she was awarded (Johnston , 1994 . A district judge denied Clinton 's request for dismissal , but ruled that investigations and trials into Clinton 's behavior could be deferred until after his term as President was up (USSC , 1997

The Eight District Court of Appeals likewise ruled that Clinton 's motion for immunity ought not be granted , but it found that deferring the investigation gave Clinton temporary immunity that he was not constitutionally entitled to . The court reasoned that the president was not above the law , rather , he was subject to the same rules as ordinary citizens . While the president was allowed immunity from charges against his official acts , he could still , said the court , be held accountable for unofficial acts . His private conduct , according to the Eigth District Court , could be held under scrutiny (USSC , 1997

The court , in Clinton v . Jones addressed several constitutional questions , but dismissed two . One was whether or not a similar claim to Clinton 's would be successful on the state level . The second was whether or not the court had the power to demand the president 's presence at any time . The court did address three constitutional questions , however . The first was whether or not the president had the right to immunity in affairs not related to his official business . The court did not find it necessary to answer the first two questions , but did find that the president 's immunity did not extend to his private conduct (USSC , 1997 The second was whether or not the court finding that the president did not have immunity in such cases violated the separation of powers . The court ruled that it did not . The third was whether or not the court , by submitting Clinton to investigations , might...