Clinton v. Jones

Concurrence by Breyer

Although the constitution does not automatically grant clinton an immunity from civil lawsuits, a federal judge may not interfere with Clinton's discharge of his public duties once Clinton sets forth and explains how they conflict with judicial proceedings.

Facts

In May of 1991, Jones worked as a state employee at a conference for which Clinton gave a speech. Jones claimed that a state police officer persuaded her to go to Clinton's hotel room, where Clinton proceeded to make sexual advances, toward her. Jones alleged experienced on-the-job retaliation because she rejected these advances. When Clinton was elected President in 1992, Jones claimed she was defamed when spokesmen for Clinton denied her allegations, branding Jones a liar. On May 6, 1994, Jones filed suit in District court and clinton filed a motion to dismiss based on Presidential immunity.

Issue

Is a serving President, for separation of powers reasons, entitled to absolute immunity from civil litigation arising out of events which transpired prior to his taking office?

Holding

No

Procedure

The district court denied the motion to dismiss, but delayed the trial until after Clinton left office. Both parties appealed and the court of appeals affirmed the denial of the motion to dismiss, but reversed the delay in the trial.

Judgment

affirmed lower court

Fact Summary

Jones claimed Clinton sexually harassed her during events that took place prior to Clinton assuming the Presidency.

Opinion by Stevens

Presidential immunity does not apply to civil damages litigation arising out of unofficial events occurring prior to the assumption of office. Here, Clinton cannot claim presidential immunity b/c his actions occurred in an unofficial capacity during a time prior to his assuming the presidency. Because the conduct occurred in an unofficial capacity, this ruling will not make any president unduly cautious in the discharge of his official duties. With respect to the separation of powers, the litigation questions that relate entirely to the unofficial conduct of the individual to happens to be President poses no perceptible risk of misallocation of either judicial power or executive power.