•  
  •  
 

Abstract

In the Clinton Case, the Eighth Circuit holds that a federal government entity, the White House, cannot assert the attorney-client privilege to avoid complying with a federal grand jury subpoena. This holding is troubling for three reasons. First, it is based on a narrow search for controlling case law that is misguided. Second, it disregards the common law and several cases holding that the attorneyclient privilege can be asserted to protect conversations between government attorneys and government officials. Finally, the broad interpretation of this holding, which suggests that the attorney-client privilege will not protect any communications between government attorneys and officials regarding violations of either federal or state law, is troubling because it fails to uphold the purposes behind the attorney client privilege.

Share

COinS