Search results
Fitzgerald sought civil damages, and President Nixon argued that he was absolutely immune from suit for actions taken in his official capacity. The district and circuit courts rejected the president’s claim of immunity, and the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
In 1968, Fitzgerald, then a civilian analyst with the United States Air Force, testified before a congressional committee about inefficiencies and cost overruns in the production of the C-5A transport plane. Roughly one year later he was fired, an action for which President Nixon took responsibility.
In January 1970 the respondent A. Ernest Fitzgerald lost his job as a management analyst with the Department of the Air Force. Fitzgerald's dismissal occurred in the context of a departmental reorganization and reduction in force, in which his job was eliminated.
Denying the defendants' motion for summary judgment, the court held that respondent had stated triable causes of action under two federal statutes and the First Amendment, and that petitioner was not entitled to claim absolute Presidential immunity.
Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 731 (1982), was a United States Supreme Court decision written by Justice Lewis Powell dealing with presidential immunity from civil liability for actions taken while in office.
Fitzgerald sued Nixon for damages after the Civil Service Commission concluded that his dismissal was unjust. Issue. Is the President immune from prosecution in a civil suit? Held. Yes, the petitioner, as a former President of the United States, is entitled to absolute immunity from damages liability predicated on his official acts.
Procedural Posture: Fitzgerald sued the President and several of his officials for damages, alleging violation of his First Amendment and other statutory rights due to his firing. 4. Issue: Whether the President is entitled to absolute immunity from damages liability predicated on his official acts.
