{"word_count": 432, "character_count": 3307}
Cornell Law Review, March 2003 v88 i3 p651(82)Presidential papers and popular government: the convergence of constitutional and property theory in claims of ownership and control of presidential records. Jonathan Turley.INTRODUCTIONI. A QUESTION OF OWNERSHIP: HISTORICAL EVOLUTION OFPRESIDENTIAL PAPERS FROM PERSONAL TO PUBLICPROPERTYA. The Historical Assertion and Consequences ofPersonal Ownership of Presidential PapersB. The Presidential Records Act and the Assertion ofPublic Ownership over Presidential PapersC. Executive Order 13,233 and the Reassertion ofUnilateral Executive Control over PresidentialPapersII. THE PROPERTY PARADIGM: LOCKE'S LABOR THEORY ANDTHE PRIVATE OWNERSHIP OF PRESIDENTIAL PAPERSIII. THE CONSTITUTIONAL PARADIGM: EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGEAND THE STATUS OF FORMER PRESIDENTS IN THEASSERTION AND TRANSFER OF EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGEA. The Executive Privilege and the Constitutional Basisfor Denial of Public Access to Presidential Papers1. The Curious Constitutional Status of the FormerPresident2. The Temporal Dimension to Executive Privilege3. The Transferability of Executive Privilege to ThirdPartiesB. The Convergence of Constitutional and PropertyTheories in the Status of Presidential Papers as"Constitutional Property"IV. THE PROPERTY PARADIGM RECONSIDERED: THE PUBLICCLAIM TO OWNERSHIP OF PRESIDENTIAL PAPERSA. The Property Basis for Public Ownership ofPresidential RecordsB. The Alternative Rationales for the RetroactiveApplication of Public Ownership over Pre-PRAPresidential Records1. Direct Public Acquisition2. Involuntary Acquisition with CompensationCONCLUSIONThis Article addresses the long-standing dispute over the disclosure of presidential papers from historical, constitutional, and philosophical perspectives. Recently, President Bush rekindled this controversy by issuing an executive order that could significantly reduce public access to presidential records. Professor Jonathan Turley uses this controversy to reconsider some of the most fundamental questions of private versus public ownership of presidential papers, and argues that the roots of the ongoing controversy in this area can be found not in constitutional law but in property law. After offering a detailed account of how papers were transferred or bequeathed by presidents as far back as George Washington, Professor Turley argues that historical practice regarding the control of presidential papers reflects a distinctly Lockean and deontological view of property. Although new property concepts took hold in other areas, this view of private ownership remained dominant in the area of presidential papers well into the twentieth century. Professor Turley examines the basis for a proprietary theory of presidential papers under Lockean, Hegelian, and utilitarian perspectives. Ultimately, he concludes that none of these theories offers compelling support for the traditional view of private ownership of these records. After critiquing the Bush order and identifying serious constitutional flaws in its provisions, Professor Turley offers a new conceptual foundation for presidential papers as jus publicum, or inherently public property. As such, he argues, presidential papers currently held by heirs of former presidents should be subject to public protection or even public acquisition. 