Independent Counsel Research Articles

Kenneth W. Starr

Profile of Kenneth W. Starr (US Solicitor General 1989-93) written at the time of his lecture at the IALS on “Ethics in Government: the Presidency and the Independent Counsel”. Published in the Profile section of Amicus Curiae - Journal of the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies and its Society for Advanced Legal Studies. The Journal is produced by the Society for Advanced Legal Studies at the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, University of London.

Republic of Palau

Republic of Palau Donald R. Shuster (bio) President Johnson Toribiong's third year in office was very busy. One of the most important issues was the finalization of negotiations of the Amended Compact of Free Association with the United States. This was done in early September when Toribiong and Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs Frankie Reed signed a six-page, ten-part agreement with funding support totaling $229 million for fiscal years 2011-2024. It included an additional estimated $36 million in US federal programs and services, but without a cap on the total amount of federal dollars available. Initially there was hope that the US Congress would pass the agreement before the end of 2010, but Mr Toribiong was not able to testify before Congress until June 2011. While his testimony was respectful and comprehensive, he made a case for special consideration by mentioning Palauans serving and making the ultimate sacrifice in the United States' conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, Palau's nearly unanimous support for the United States in United Nations voting, and overtures made to Palau by the People's Republic of China. He said, "We all want greater economic interaction with China, but it should be without compromising the close alliance between Palau and the United States." In his testimony before the US Senate, he strongly urged support from the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources and from Congress as a whole. At the time of this review, Congress had not acted on the amended compact agreement. President Toribiong hosted two important regional meetings in 2010: one with the Micronesian presidents in July and one with the Micronesian chief executives in December. A communiqué was issued for the first meeting and a 225-page proceedings document for the second. Three key issues addressed at both meetings were the high rates of non-communicable diseases, the depletion of Micronesia's fisheries resources, and adaptation to climate change in the islands. It is generally acknowledged that the pillars of good governance include a public auditor, a special prosecutor, [End Page 163] a free and independent press, and a competent, independent judiciary. By mid-year, Palau had no public auditor (although it has had an acting auditor for over ten years) and no special prosecutor. Furthermore, the president had fired the special counsel hired to prosecute those responsible for the collapse of the Pacific Savings Bank (the so-called People's Bank) in 2006. In February 2011 the president appointed Assistant Attorney General Lucketta McMahon as the new independent counsel. However, McMahon is new to Palau and very new to the savings bank collapse. President Toribiong is a superb speaker and appeared before the UN General Assembly. Mentioning Palau's peacekeeping efforts in Darfur, Timor Leste, and Solomon Islands, he also reported on his nation's efforts to maintain the viability of Pacific fish stocks by limiting purse seine activity as well as on the work being done by the Pacific Small Island Developing States to persuade the world that climate change is not merely a development issue but also a security issue. Toribiong called on the UN Security Council to include Japan in its ranks and requested that the world body also include Taiwan in select UN activities. In response to the president's appeal to the world's conscience, Germany volunteered to assist in the removal of explosives left over from World War II battles on Palau's southern islands of Peleliu and Angaur. In January 2011, the president delivered special remarks to the World League for Freedom and Democracy in Taipei, Republic of China. In those remarks he stressed how his nation has demonstrated its dedication to the principles enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Finally, Toribiong addressed the graduates of Palau Community College in late May, delivering a very personal message that emphasized goals and passion as necessary for success in any endeavor. It was a grand speech that mixed Palauan proverbs with personal experiences. In April, the president presented his third progress report, known as the State of the Republic Address. It was comprehensive and laudatory of his ministries. The president announced that the compact...

Straight talk with...Harvey Fineberg

In 1970, the US government chartered the Institute of Medicine (IOM), a component of the National Academies, to serve as an independent counsel on issues concerning health policy. Today, the IOM has become a leading adviser on an array of topics from vaccine safety to the organizational structure of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The institute has nearly 1,600 members who carry out studies, conduct workshops, hold public forums and publish influential reports. Harvey Fineberg, former provost of Harvard University, has served at the helm of the IOM as the institute's president since 2002. During his tenure at the institute, Fineberg has overseen a raft of studies on topics ranging from AIDS prevention to new medical technologies. He spoke to Prashant Nair about the role of the IOM in biomedical research in the US.

Public Watchdogs or Imperial Pitbulls: An Evaluation of Special Prosecutor Investigations of Executive Branch Misconduct

The independent counsel investigation process was created to provide a politically neutral and independent avenue for investigating executive misconduct. Twenty investigations of high-ranking department and White House officials occurred during the independent counsel era. During this time, the process was criticized for a lack of accountability, for politicization, and for ineffectiveness in terms of investigatory outcomes. This research provides an empirical evaluation of the primary criticisms of the investigatory process by utilizing data concerning the investigations conducted during the independent counsel era (1978–1999), as well as information from more recent investigations conducted by special counsels appointed directly by the attorney general (1999 to the present). Specifically, I analyze the charge of lack of accountability by measuring the cost, duration, and expansion of jurisdiction for each independent and special counsel investigation. To analyze politicization of the process, I evaluated the impact of divided government and congressional involvement in the investigatory process. Last, the article provides a brief evaluation of the effectiveness of the investigations under review.

The Law: Executive Power and Prosecution: Lessons from the Libby Trial and the U.S. Attorney Firings

Presidential control of federal prosecution has created, throughout American history, tensions between realities of political control and ideal of rule of law. While control guarantees a measure of democratic accountability for how law enforcement power is exercised, potential for that political control to become politicized is always there and has periodically erupted in significant scandals in American politics. Between 2003 and 2007, two such scandals occurred, serving to remind us of tenuous balance in federal law enforcement system between accountability and independence and between politics and rule of law. The investigation and prosecution of Vice Dick Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis Scooter Libby, by an independent special counsel demonstrates that our long argument about how best to handle criminal allegations against high-ranking branch officials, started in modern context by Watergate, has yet to be resolved. The scandal that erupted in 2007 over firing of U.S. attorneys, leading to resignation of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, demonstrates that conflict over political control of prosecutorial power is not just isolated to a few high-profile cases. Both cases remind us of importance of attorney general as linchpin in federal justice system between president and prosecutors and difficulties created by dual roles that attorneys general play as both presidential advisors and law enforcement officers. When that delicate balance tips toward political side of job, confidence in impartial administration of justice is undermined. Issues in Executive Control of Prosecution The root of conflict over how much control president should exercise over prosecutorial function lies within U.S. Constitution. The source of authority is found in Article II power to take care that laws be faithfully executed and in president's ability to appoint, by advice and consent of Senate, officers to aid him in execution of law. Advocates of a strong executive understanding of presidential power argue that president has all of law enforcement power because such power is in nature, and that in order to fulfill this Article II command, he must have complete control over officers exercising this power on his behalf. Justice Antonin Scalia argued this position strenuously in his dissent in Morrison v. Olson, 1988 case upholding independent counsel statute. (1) This expansive notion of presidential power, particularly as it relates to prosecution, has been challenged on several fronts. First, historical experience with development of federal prosecution shows that this power was not perceived as inherently executive or under unitary control of in early days of country. Rather, prosecution was highly decentralized and controlled, if at all, not by attorney general but by judicial authorities and through comptroller general (who was, in turn, controlled by Congress) and Department of Treasury (Krent 1989; Lessig and Sunstein 1994). Lawrence Lessig and Cass R. Sunstein contend that if the framers' and early Congresses' actual practice is any indication of their original understanding, then they did not understand prosecution to be within notion of 'executive Power' exclusively, and therefore did not understand it to be within exclusive domain of President (1994, 15-16). Even as federal prosecutorial power expanded and Department of Justice was created in 1870 in an effort to centralize control of federal law enforcement, prosecution remained highly decentralized, with U.S. attorneys operating with a high degree of autonomy from control by Main Justice. The nature of federal system and size and complexity of federal legal apparatus all contributed to relative independence of U. …

Participation in Attorney-Client Transactions: An Analysis of the Ethical Issues

In this article I review the case law regarding attorney-client transactions and attempt to extrapolate from those cases a sense of the current state of the law. Specifically, I show that the case law applies a stringent standard to attorney-client dealings that can make participation in them perilous. Finally, I conclude by proposing that a safe harbor in attorney-client transactions can be only be found when the non-attorney party consults with an independent counsel or, failing that, the attorney party encouraged such consultations and the non-attorney party's decision not to is properly memorialized in writing.

Pall Audit Committee completes tax inquiry

US-based Pall Corporation reports that the Audit Committee of its board of directors, with the assistance of independent counsel, has completed its inquiry into the firm's previously announced understatement of its US federal income tax payments and of its provision for income taxes.

Het Lewinsky-schandaal. Van pekelzonde tot impeachment

This article discusses the Monica Lewinsky scandal which concerned a love affair between the President of the United States and a 21 year old trainee Monica Lewinsky. The affair started in the summer of 1995 and became public knowledge in January 1998. At first it seemed that a real 'Lewinsky gate' was in the<br /> making but as it turned out - surprisingly for many - the public was not willing to participate in the kind of character assassination some of Clinton's mostly Republican political adversaries had in mind. 'Independent counsel' Kenneth Starr was seen to be less independent than he should have been and much more politically prejudiced. Although Clinton clearly lied under oath about the nature of his relationship with Lewinsky public opinion remained solidly opposed to impeachment. The author concludes that this scandal does not confirm James Lull and Stephen Hinerman's thesis that 'managers of modern news media actively try to turn stories into scandals.' If the media had lived up to the thesis Clinton certainly would have lost the presidency.

The Impeachment Trial of President William Clinton

In 1999, for only the second time in United States history, the Senate conducted an impeachment trial of a President. The acquittal of William Jefferson Clinton on February 12 came as no great surprise, given the near party-line vote on impeachment charges in the House of Representatives leading to the trial. The impeachment saga of President Clinton has its origins in a sexual harassment lawsuit brought in Arkansas in May, 1994 by Paula Jones, a former Arkansas state employee. Lawyers for Clinton argued that the Jones suit would distract him from the important tasks of his office and should not be allowed to go forward while he occupied the White House. Clinton's immunity claim eventually reached the United States Supreme Court. The Court ruled unanimously in May, 1997 against the President, and allowed discovery in the case to proceed. As a result of the Supreme Court's action, Judge Susan Weber Wright allowed discovery to proceed in the Paula Jones lawsuit. Judge Wright ruled that lawyers for Jones, in order to help prove her sexual harassment claim, could inquire into any sexual relationships that Clinton might have with subordinates either as Governor of Arkansas or as President of the United States. A critical moment in the cascade of events that would eventually lead to impeachment came on December 5, 1997 when Jones's lawyers submitted a list of women that they would like to depose. Included on the list the name of Monica Lewinsky. This is a trial that never should have happened. Clinton should have reached an early settlement (or defaulted) in his suit with Jones, which would have happened if he'd been honest with his own lawyers about his sexual history. The Supreme Court should have struck down the independent counsel law as a violation of separation of powers when it had a chance to do so in 1988. The Supreme Court missed a second chance to prevent impeachment when it failed to recognize, in Clinton v. Jones, that civil suits against a sitting president had the serious potential to be a major distraction from the president's duties. Clinton should not have trusted Lewinsky to be discreet. Kenneth Starr should not have engaged in a sting operation against the President of the United States, and the Administration should not have engaged in an operation to trash the OIC. Finally, of course, the President should not have lied under oath about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky. Despite its predictable outcome, the impeachment trial of President Clinton is well worth studying, both for what it says about the failure of the judiciary and political institutions to respond adequately to an unprecedented situation, and what it tells us about the failures of Bill Clinton, the all-too-human occupant of the nation's highest office. The trial also raises fascinating questions about the distinction between public morality and private morality.

Why Did Clinton Survive the Impeachment Crisis? A Test of Three Explanations

In Federalist no. 65, Alexander Hamilton wrote that the impeachment process is a decidedly political one. We use data from a national survey conducted in September and October 1998 to examine explanations for Bill Clinton's survival of the impeachment crisis: the robust economy, his own high popular standing with the public, and the concomitantly lower public evaluations of his principal investigators, Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr and the Republican-controlled U.S. Congress. Our analysis demonstrates that the performance of the U.S. economy did directly influence public support for impeachment, resignation, continued congressional hearings, and censure (four potential punishment options), but not in the manner most often hypothesized. More favorable assessments of the U.S. economy actually were related to higher levels of support for punishing the president. Evaluations of the president proved to be a double-edged sword. Although higher evaluations of Clinton's personal job approval ratings and of his personal ethics ratings are related to lower levels of support for punishment, Clinton benefited more from the former than the latter, as his approval ratings were high while the public held considerable doubts about his ethics. Finally, we show that higher public evaluations of Clinton's primary investigators, Starr and the U.S. Congress, were related to higher levels of support for punishing the president. As both actors had an exceedingly low average approval rating, however, this dynamic worked to Clinton's advantage.

Official corruption and the dynamics of money laundering in Nigeria

PurposeThis paper aims to examine the interface between official corruption and money laundering in Nigeria and suggest ways of curbing these crimes.Design/methodology/approachThe relevant laws dealing with these offences were examined to assess the adequacy or otherwise of the statutory provisions. The key provisions of the Criminal and Penal Codes were discussed in addition to the new enactments dealing with these crimes, namely, the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission Act, the Money Laundering Act as well as the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal provided for in the 1999 Constitution.FindingsIt was found that these recent enactments have gone much further than the earlier provisions dealing with these crimes. They contain some far‐reaching innovations such as the provision for the appointment of an Independent Counsel to investigate allegations of corruption against the president, vice president, governors and deputy governors. It was also found that a number of problems could, if not properly handled, hinder the effective enforcement of these enactments.Practical implicationsThe implication of these findings is that the aforesaid statutory provisions can only be effective if the identified problems of enforcement are adequately tackled and the monitoring mechanism strengthened.Originality/valueThe paper demonstrates in a unique manner, the close relationship that exists between official corruption and money laundering and suggests a fundamental re‐structuring of the social and economic basis of the Nigerian society to minimize the temptation by public officers to engage in official corruption and money laundering.

The Death of Emerson: Writing, Loss, and Divine Presence

When I cruise the forty-three television channels available to me (and that's ba sic cable), simultaneously being enchanted and disgusted by much that I see (a kind of Kantian sublime), I cannot help but think that the culture in which I find myself is less articulate than ever. For this situation perhaps the 43rd President of the United States could serve as a useful emblem?a joke that is all too easy to make. But such a diagnosis of the low standard of my culture's literacy might also be too easy to make. For it is the case that America's traditional anti-intel lectualism reaches new heights in our current, hypermediated milieu: we now have more venues than ever to disseminate undisciplined, uncreative thought (think, for example, of all the burgeoning blogs). On the other hand, such hypermedia tion amounts to an explosion of symbolization. Language is everywhere, and hence there is the demand to use it instrumentally well. Again, an image from the U.S. presidency is emblematic. Think of President Clinton's infamous line to the intrepid Independent Counsel: "It depends on what your definition of the word 'is' is." Such a line could represent the pervasive urge to absolutely precise articulation, controlling one's words to an extreme degree. Another emblem could be the common academic paper where a writer has masterfully summarized and explained the words of another thinker, rendering them more accessible but prob ably not more desirable. One could read this situation dialectically: the moment when concern for the value of language seems lowest is also the moment when the demand for controlling language is highest. Beyond dialectics, however, I take the demand for absolute articulation as a jumping-off point for considering an idea that might appear to have nothing to do with this implicit yet persistent demand?the concept of presence. More specifically, I want to consider how a particular rendering of this concept affects what we might call the divine and its relationship to an ostensibly secular culture, and I also want to consider some lines from Emerson and how they can lead one to think of the divine as pres ence, a presence that requires an absence, a presence that to some extent is an absence. According to this encounter with Emerson, thinking about the presence and absence of the divine has to do with the way one takes up writing.

The real role of corporate directors: balancing prudence with progress

PurposeThis essay argues that many directors are never inducted and developed into their board directoral roles. By not understanding their legal roles and tasks as a director, as distinct from a manager, they can rarely extract themselves for long enough to become skilled at thinking strategically, assessing risks, and taking wise decisions for the future health of their companyDesign/methodology/approachThe paper draws on many years experience of working with boards. It advocates the use of the Learning Board model, the Thinking Intentions Profile psychometric, reading newspapers and journals systematically and getting out more, as ways of creating the conditions in which strategic thinking can be developed effectively.FindingsThree key conditions must be met before it is possible to achieve an effective board. First, agreement around the boardroom table that they will accept as essential board selection, induction, training and development, annual appraisal of the board and each director. Second, that the board chairman is fully committed to these, including his or her own 360 degree annual appraisal and is backed strongly by a truly independent company secretary or legal counsel. Third, that all directors have the same annual contract for services which spells out the time they need to devote to their crucial direction‐giving role.Originality/valueThis paper is of particular value to Boards in the UK, Europe and the USA and to senior executives.

Trying to Match SOX

Directors of public and private companies face increased scrutiny and potential attacks on several fronts. Those include 1) government enforcers and plaintiffs taking directors9 personal assets; 2) governance reforms enacted at the state and federal level; 3) court rulings which strip directors of the attorney-client privilege; 4) attacks against the safe harbor of the business judgment rule; and 5) insurers trying to rescind directors9 insurance policies. Directors can take steps to protect themselves while still meeting the higher standards. These include hiring independent counsel for non-management directors, restructuring the D&amp;O insurance program, and taking particular actions if the company winds up in bankruptcy.

Public Support for Press Access Declines as Personal Privacy Concerns Increase

Government officials are increasingly closing public records because of citizen concern about invasion,1 and the increased secrecy inhibits the press's ability to monitor government and shed light on societal problems. This exploratory study investigates the relationship between public attitudes toward invasion and access.The threat of easy access to information by cyber-stalkers, identity thieves, marketers and others has increased political pressure for government records closures, such as Congress's approval in 1994 of the DriversPrivacy Protection Act, which restricted driver's license information.2 Privacy is the most-cited reason government officials use to deny access to public records. One study of 13 federal agencies showed that 80 percent of public records requests denials from 1998 to 2002 were because of privacy. Only 1 percent of denials were for national security reasons, even after the Sept. 11,2001, terrorist attacks.3 A similar study sponsored by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press found a six-fold increase from 1998 to 2002 in the use of exemptions in the Freedom of Information Act by 25 federal agencies. In 2002 the agencies used exemptions to deny 380,000 public records requests.4The courts have given more weight toward concerns in recent years.5 For example, the U.S. Supreme Court limited access to electronic government records because of concerns in its 1989 ruling Department of Justice v. Reporters Committee.6 More recently, on March 30, 2004, the Supreme Court extended protections to surviving family members of the deceased. In Office of Independent Counsel v. Favish the court determined that the concerns of family members overshadowed the need for public access to autopsy photos of Vincent Foster, former deputy White House counsel for President Bill Clinton. Foster had been found dead in a park in what officials concluded was a shooting suicide. The photos were sought in order to independently investigate whether Foster's death was suicide or government-sanctioned murder.7Even journalists seem to be more sensitive to privacy.8 Surveys of newspaper editors in 1993 and 1999 showed a 12.2 percent drop, from 71 percent to 58.8 percent, in support of reporting private matters-such as extramarital affairs-of public officials.9Achieving protection by closing government records, however, comes at a price. Access to government information is considered a critical function in a self-governing democracy.' As a result of the records closures, journalists say they are unable to monitor government adequately or to expose societal problems as effectively as they had in the mid-1990s.11Literature ReviewRarely have the two conceptsconcern for invasion and support for press rights-been studied together.12 Driscoll, Splichal, Salwen and Garrison conducted a nationwide survey in 1998 of 403 adults regarding access to public records, finding that support varied depending on the nature of the record and who sought the information.13 For example, 85 percent of those surveyed agreed police need access to government records for their jobs, but only 49 percent agreed the media need open records to do their jobs. Study participants also reported that open records could be a threat to their personal privacy.A similar study the same year found that people were concerned about their and that they were actually more supportive of marketers' access to records than they were for journalists' access.14These studies have beenbuilt upon decades of research regarding public support for free expression.15 Studies have demonstrated that increased fear is related to decreased public support for civil liberties.16 One specific type of fear is concern for invasion. Need for privacy has been defined as the need for people to control how information about themselves is communicated . …

The Prosecution of Public Figures and the Separation of Powers. Confusion within the Executive Branch – A Conceptual Framework

Criminal investigation and prosecution of politicians, top civil servants and other public figures are topics frequently discussed in the media. The nature of the investigating or prosecuting authority varies between countries - from the general public prosecutor, through magistrates to independent counsels or parliamentary investigation commissions. This paper analyzes the role and status of public prosecutors within the separation of powers-concept. Prosecutors are usually part of the executive and not the judicial branch, which implies that they do not enjoy the same degree of independence as judges, and are ultimately subordinated to the directives of the minister of justice or the government. Conflicts of interest may hence arise if members of government can use the criminal process for their own or partisan interests. The incentives of public prosecutors in different jurisdictions are compared.

A New Player in the Boardroom: The Emergence of the Independent Directors' Counsel

Over the last thirty years, the independent directors have occasionally been represented by independent counsel. Instances include: special litigation committees reviewing derivative suits; independent committees in parent subsidiary mergers and MBOs; and internal investigations of misconduct. We predict that, with the additional legal requirements imposed on independent directors by the Sarbanes Oxley Act and related changes to SEC rules and Stock Exchange listing requirements, the independent directors, especially those on the Audit Committee, increasingly will be represented on a continuing basis by independent legal counsel. Out of this will emerge a new figure in the board room: the Independent Directors' Counsel. We examine the advantages and disadvantages of adding this new actor in the boardroom, and consider issues posed and implications for corporate law and legal ethics.

Managing and Monitoring Conflicts of Interest: Empowering the Outside Directors with Independent Counsel

For most of the last one hundred years, the corporate approach toward related party transactions has been they can be managed, not prohibited. The most common approach toward managing conflicts of interests is review by the board's directors. The well-received monitoring role for directors of public companies envisions the outside directors carrying out their responsibilities to manage related party transactions, particularly pursuant to state conflict of interest statutes. This article makes the case that the ability of the outside directors to discharge this monitoring task in the case of related party transactions with senior managers is dependent upon their being assisted by independent counsel (counsel with no on-going relationship with the company or its senior management). Independent counsel is not now required for the board's review of conflict of interest transactions. However, we see that in analogous conflict situations that an counsel is an essential element for assessing the overall independence of the outside directors' actions. Thus, selectively injecting counsel is advanced as a modest extension of the law governing conflict of interest transactions that will significant impact in improving the quality of the outside directors' monitoring and managing related party transactions involving senior management.

Avoiding Captain Ahabs

The 1978 independent counsel law was designed to create an impartial prosecutor to increase public confidence that high-ranking government officials accused of misconduct would be fairly investigated. Many independent counsels have come under bipartisan criticism for being overzealous. Such overzealousness and excessive persistence may not be the random result of isolated personalities but may instead be the predictable outcome of escalation determinants embedded in the position of independent counsel. The author outlines these escalation determinants, shows how they may have influenced independent counsels, demonstrates how they may be counteracted, and discusses the general implications for the design of administrative positions.

The Presidency and the law: the Clinton legacy

Political scandals have always demonstrated the capacity of our executive officials for self-inflicted injuries, and the Clinton administration was no exception. Unilateral war-making, claims of executive privilege and immunity, and last-minute pardons all tested the limits of presidential power, while the excesses of the Special Prosecutor cast doubts on available remedies. For eight years, Republicans and Democrats engaged in guerrilla warfare aimed at destroying the careers and lives of their adversaries, while tests of presidential power were resolved by the courts, resulting in a reshaping of the scope and power of the presidency itself. This book examines the many controversial and important battles that led to the shrinking of the presidency under the law during the Clinton administration. Located at the intersection of law and politics, it helps readers understand the dramatic changes that took place in the relationship of presidential power to the law during the Clinton years and shows how one president's actions - and congressional and legal reactions to them - have altered presidential prerogatives in ways that his successors cannot ignore. The Presidency and the Law assesses changes in our constitutional and legal understanding of the American presidency, exploring such topics as war power, executive privilege, pardon power, impeachment, executive immunity, independent counsel, and campaign finance. In examining these collisions between the president and the law, its distinguished contributors bring the lessons of Watergate and Iran-Contra into the Clinton era and contribute to a Madisonian view that presidents should not operate outside statutory and constitutional constraints. Although quite critical in many respects, a number of these authors have been supportive of Clinton and his policy pursuits, and all seek to examine the potential impact of the Clinton administration without being predictive or legalistic. Still, under Bill Clinton's stewardship, the legal, constitutional, and political terrain changed in significant ways. It remains to be seen what impact these changes will have on the presidency in the twenty-first century. This book points the way to assessing that impact and is essential reading for anyone concerned with the future of our democracy.