During the night of June 17, 1972, five burglars broke into the offices of the Democratic National Committee at the Watergate office complex in Washington, DC. Investigation into the break-in exposed a trail of abuses that led to the highest levels of the Nixon administration and ultimately to the President himself. The grand jury issued a subpoena for audiotapes that were recorded of Nixon and his staff discussing the break-in. The tapes were damaging to Nixon and his administration and he refused to give them up. Nixon claimed that it was his "executive privilege" to withhold information from other government branches if that information was damaging to national security or the presidency.
Nixon versus the United States was argued on July 8, 1974 and was decided on July 24, 1974. In the case, only eight of the nine justices voted in the trial. All but William Rehnquist (who did not vote) voted in the majority that the president did not have a special privilege to withhold information if he sees fit to do so. The general opinion of the court was that the president could not safeguard certain information from other branches of government. Within the court, the justices knew that Nixon was guilty of or was involved in this break-in, and that these tapes would be the proving evidence.
The Constitutional issue raised in this case was just how much power does a president have. Is the president immune to judicial review and subpoenas? After United States vs. Nixon, the president was found to have no specific right to be above the law and could not withhold any information over the Supreme Court. The Court granted that there was a limited executive privilege in areas of military or diplomatic affairs, but he could not escape or hold back anything that may be used against him in the court of law.
The court could not find any document stating that the president was able to withhold information in a court case, and therefore the ruling of United States vs.