In the case of William Jefferson Clinton v. Paula Corbin Jones, 1996, Paula Jones filed a sexual harassment lawsuit against President Bill Clinton for an incident that allegedly occurred while he was governor of Arkansas. The Supreme Court ruled unanimously that a sitting president does not have temporary immunity from a civil lawsuit for actions taken before entering office or unrelated to the office. This decision allowed Jones' case to proceed in court while Clinton was still in office. However, it also established that certain privileges do exist regarding presidential scheduling and duties so as not to impede on necessary functions of government operations during litigation proceedings involving the president.

In the dissenting opinion for the case of William Jefferson Clinton v. Paula Corbin Jones, Justice Stephen Breyer argued that a sitting President should have temporary immunity from civil lawsuits arising out of actions taken before he assumed office. He believed that such lawsuits could distract a president from his public duties to an extent where it would significantly interfere with the performance of his constitutional role. The majority's decision, according to him, did not sufficiently consider this potential impact on presidential functioning and national welfare at large. Furthermore, he suggested that delaying private litigation until after a president leaves office does not deny justice but merely postpones it in order to prioritize matters related directly to governance and public interest.