This 1974 supreme court case held that executive privilege may not be invoked to deny the courts access to evidence needed in a criminal proceeding.

The 1974 Supreme Court case that held that executive privilege may not be invoked to deny the courts access to evidence needed in a criminal proceeding was United States v. Nixon.

Explanation:

The Supreme Court ruling in United States v. Nixon of 1974 is a landmark decision on the limits of the powers of the President of the United States in relation to the other branches of government and to the domestic information system.

As part of the Watergate affair, President Nixon was asked by the Special Investigator and later by Congress to publish tapes recorded in the White House, which could have contributed to the investigation of the affair. Nixon, however, refused to release the tapes and instead offered copies of some of the recordings. The Judge of the District Court for Washington DC insisted on the release of the tapes, and the dispute eventually came before the Supreme Court of the United States.

The Supreme Court had to decide whether the legislature or the judiciary had the right to demand that the President of the United States, and thus the executive, publish it, or whether, as Nixon argued, this would violate the principle of separation of powers.

In its unanimous decision, the Supreme Court first made it clear that it had the competence to determine to what extent the United States Constitution restricts the powers of the President, and that the Constitution provides that laws may be enforced against the President. With regard to the executive power of the President, it stated that, in any case, it would not be given priority when it comes to the publication of evidence that is demonstrably relevant in criminal proceedings. So the tapes had to be released.

both include an amendment process.

answer: a parliamentary system is a system of democratic governance of a state where the executive derives its democratic legitimacy from its ability to command the confidence of the legislature, typically a parliament, and is also held accountable to that parliament. in a parliamentary system, the head of state is usually a person distinct from the head of government. this is in contrast to a presidential system, where the head of state often is also the head of government and, most importantly, the executive does not derive its democratic legitimacy from the legislature.

countries with parliamentary democracies may be constitutional monarchies, where a monarch is the head of state while the head of government is almost always a member of parliament (such as the united kingdom, denmark, sweden, and japan), or parliamentary republics, where a mostly ceremonial president is the head of state while the head of government is regularly from the legislature (such as ireland, germany, india, and italy). in a few parliamentary republics, such as botswana, south africa, and suriname, among some others, the head of government is also head of state, but is elected by and is answerable to parliament. in bicameral parliaments, the head of government is generally, though not always, a member of the lower house.

parliamentarianism is the dominant form of government in europe, with 32 of its 50 sovereign states being parliamentarian. it is also common in the caribbean, being the form of government of 10 of its 13 island states, and in oceania. elsewhere in the world, parliamentary countries are less common, but they are distributed through all continents, most often in former colonies of the british empire that subscribe to a particular brand of parliamentarianism known as the westminster system.

explanation: