The case of Nixon v. Administrator of General Services was a significant decision by the United States Supreme Court in 1977, which involved former President Richard Nixon's attempts to prevent the public release of his presidential papers and tapes following his resignation from office. The Presidential Recordings and Materials Preservation Act (PRMPA) required that these materials be kept by the government until they could be screened for historical significance. Nixon challenged this law as an invasion of privacy, violation of executive privilege, and breach of separation-of-powers principles. However, the Supreme Court upheld PRMPA in a 7-2 ruling stating that neither separation-of-powers nor privacy were absolute rights and must yield to compelling governmental interests such as preserving historical records for future generations or investigating potential criminal activity within an administration.

In the dissenting opinion for Nixon v. Administrator of General Services, Justice William Rehnquist argued that the Presidential Recordings and Materials Preservation Act was unconstitutional because it violated former President Richard Nixon's right to privacy. He contended that by allowing government archivists to review all of Nixon’s presidential papers, including personal and private documents, the law infringed upon his Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures. Furthermore, he believed this act represented a bill of attainder - legislation punishing an individual without trial - which is expressly prohibited by the Constitution. The majority ruling allowed Congress to single out one individual (Nixon) for punishment in violation of separation-of-powers principles as well as due process protections under Fifth Amendment according to Rehnquist's view.