How we cite our quotes: (Section.Subsection.Paragraph) or (Section.Paragraph)
Quote #1
At a subsequent hearing, 6 further motions to expunge the grand jury's action naming the President as an unindicted coconspirator and for protective orders against the disclosure of that information were filed or raised orally by counsel for the President. (Opening.16)
During U.S. v. Nixon, the president's lawyer tried to have his charge of being an un-indicted co-conspirator erased by the courts and hidden from disclosure. It didn't work.
Quote #2
It further ordered the President or any subordinate officer, official, or employee with custody or control of the documents or objects subpoenaed to deliver to the District Court, on or before May 31, 1974, the originals of all subpoenaed items, as well as an index and analysis of those items, together with tape copies of those portions of the subpoenaed recordings for which transcripts had been released to the public by the President on April 30. (Opening.16)
This is the Court's reiteration of the original subpoena, which got this whole case rolling.
Quote #3
On March 1, 1974, a grand jury of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia returned an indictment charging seven named individuals with various offenses, including conspiracy to defraud the United States and to obstruct justice. (Opening.16)
H.R. Haldeman, John Ehrlichman, Charles Colson, John Mitchell, Robert C. Mardian, Kenneth Parkinson, and Gordon Strachan were those seven individuals. The purpose of the contested subpoena was to get information to prosecute these cases. Without the info on the tapes, it would be harder to bring these guys to justice, not to mention their un-indicted co-conspirator—Nixon himself.
Quote #4
The burden applies with even greater force to excised material; once the decision is made to excise, the material is restored to its privileged status and should be returned under seal to its lawful custodian. (IV.E.3).
The Court's saying that the district court has no right to keep subpoenaed material that's irrelevant to the case. It's once again considered privileged and it's the responsibility of the court to return it to the legal owner. They're trying to be very fair about this even while requiring the release of information that is relevant.
Quote #5
We conclude that when the ground for asserting privilege as to subpoenaed materials sought for use in a criminal trial is based only on the generalized interest in confidentiality, it cannot prevail over the fundamental demands of due process of law in the fair administration of criminal justice. The generalized assertion of privilege must yield to the demonstrated, specific need for evidence in a pending criminal trial. (Syllabus.5)
This is the Court's final decision that the use of executive privilege can't get in the way of the investigation of a criminal trial. This is probably what Nixon was afraid of: that the Supreme Court, being a judicial body, would think that the administration of justice was the most important thing. Imagine.