Los Angeles Times, January 12, 2010 by David G. Savage and Carol J. Williams
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-prop8-cameras12-2010jan12,0,1169353.story
“It’s obviously a disagreement between the 9th Circuit and the Supreme Court on bringing television or live video into a federal courtroom,” said Jesse Choper, a constitutional law scholar at UC Berkeley…. They disagreed, and the Supreme Court has the final word.”
The Fresno Bee, January 7, 2010 by Charles Piller
http://www.fresnobee.com/1148/story/1772209.html
Professor Jesse Choper, a constitutional scholar at UC Berkeley’s Boalt Hall School of Law, said that even funding for higher education should not be set in constitutional concrete, impervious to other state needs. “You’ve got to be very selective in what you make immune to normal changes of mind,” he said.
Los Angeles Times, November 13, 2009 by Josh Meyer
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-mosque-seizures13-2009nov13,0,3625317.story
“Whether it is seizing a mosque or seizing a bookstore, it doesn’t mean there is a special 1st Amendment scrutiny,” or protection, Choper said.
PBS, The NewsHour With Jim Lehrer, October 20, 2009 by Spencer Michels
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/education/july-dec09/tenure_10-20.html
Christopher Edley, dean, U.C. Berkeley Boalt Hall School of Law: While many students and faculty are critical of the Bush administration policies and even of some of John’s actions, they think that academic freedom means that his right to be here and to teach has to be protected, until or unless there’s some sort of a conviction.
Christopher Kutz, president, U.C. Berkeley Academic Senate: You need something more than simply incompetence to revoke a professor’s tenure, especially somebody who’s been hired, promoted, published in the top journals. John is one of the most prolific scholars on the Boalt faculty.
Jesse Choper, law professor: He gave them an approach that was wholly consistent with virtually everything he did as a scholar beforehand.
-Los Angeles Times, October 18, 2009 Editorial Board
http://www.latimes.com/news/obituaries/la-me-passings18-2009oct18,0,3963453,print.story
Colleagues said Barnett, who retired in 2003, was a tireless advocate of free speech rights and had spent his last years as a vocal critic of the speed with which the California Supreme Court handed down its decisions and the way it went about much of its day-to-day business.
-The Recorder, October 19, 2009 by Petra Pasternak
http://www.law.com/jsp/ca/PubArticleCA.jsp?id=1202434697325&slreturn=1&hbxlogin=1
“If there is such a thing as a constructive gadfly, that was Steve,” said Berkeley law professor Richard Buxbaum, who knew him since Barnett joined the faculty in 1967…. He had an engaging way of making deans and faculty members uncomfortably aware of some of the consequences of their decisions,” Buxbaum said, “often to the betterment later.”
Choper said he often called Barnett a muckraker because the professor would uncover policies at the school he didn’t agree with and “he just wouldn’t let it go…. He wanted to do something about it.” Choper, who served for a time as the dean, said he’d receive regular memos from Barnett outlining what he could be doing better.
-San Francisco Chronicle, October 21, 2009 by Bob Egelko
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/10/21/BAH11A6VDB.DTL&type=printable
He was a leader in “shaping public policy concerning the industrial structure and public regulation of both print and visual media,” said Richard Buxbaum, a fellow Berkeley law professor.
“In his scholarship, Steve was a devastating critic of the practices of the California Supreme Court and the California State Bar,” said another UC Berkeley colleague, Melvin Eisenberg. “He did a lot of acute, penetrating research that no one else has done regarding judicial transparency and legitimacy.”
-The New York Times, October 21, 2009 by William Grimes
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/22/us/22barnett.html?_r=2
“Stephen Barnett was probably California’s leading analyst and critic of the way the California Supreme Court goes about its business,” said Stephen Sugarman, a professor and associate dean at Berkeley’s law school.
The New York Times, October 1, 2009 by Malia Wollan and Jesse McKinley
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/02/us/02lodi.html?_r=2
Jesse H. Choper, a professor of law at the University of California, Berkeley, said that the 1983 Supreme Court ruling in Marsh v. Chambers found that prayer before public meetings was allowed if the prayers remained nonsectarian. “What we do know is the use of God is not unacceptable,” Professor Choper said.
Contra Costa Times, September 29, 2009 by Allison White
http://www.contracostatimes.com/california/ci_13443210
Jesse Choper said the letter constitutes hate speech, which is constitutionally protected. “If you could find out who sent the letter, then it becomes a matter of freedom of speech,” he said. However, that would not apply if the letter had been threatening. “If it had said, ‘If you stay on the job, you’ll suffer,’ that’s not protected,” he said.
The Oakland Tribune, September 20, 2009 by Josh Richman
http://www.contracostatimes.com/politics/ci_13354829?source=rss
“I think that great dangers to the Constitution are very much in the eyes of the beholder. When an administration is in power that people don’t like, they often find that what that administration does is threatening to our basic values,” said Jesse Choper…. And for all the rhetoric cavalierly cast about over what is and isn’t constitutional, Choper said, few people truly understand what the Constitution actually does and doesn’t say.
Pittsburgh Post Gazette, September 12, 2009 by Rich Lord and Paula Reed Lord
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09255/997503-482.stm
Mr. Choper said governments “can stop people from protesting so it disrupts the event.” But demonstrators are “entitled to some place where [they] can effectively communicate … within sight” of the targets of their message. Rules that aim to keep demonstrators from embarrassing their host city or guests have been struck down, he said.
San Francisco Chronicle, August 21, 2009 by Wyatt Buchanan
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/08/20/BASD19BBUC.DTL&tsp=1
The protections may be the first of their kind in the country, said Jesse Choper, the Earl Warren Professor of Public Law at UC Berkeley’s Boalt Hall. He said the protection is “not off the wall by any means” and said language can be a source of discrimination that people have limited control over.
The New York Times, August 13, 2009 by John Schwartz
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/14/us/14dissent.html?_r=2
Jesse H. Choper, a law professor at the University of California, Berkeley, said the judge was hardly a fierce opponent of capital punishment. “I don’t see him as someone who is unexceptionally opposed,” Mr. Choper said.
Elisabeth A. Semel, director of the Death Penalty Clinic at Berkeley, which trains lawyers to defend people facing the death penalty, said many jurists had been shaken by the rise of exonerations due to DNA evidence. “I think it’s been shattering to judges who had a fair amount of confidence in the system,” she said.
Los Angeles Times, August 9, 2009 by Maura Dolan
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-gay-marriage9-2009aug09,0,3972489.story
The challenge amounts to a “perfectly good case,” said UC Berkeley law professor Jesse Choper, “but that doesn’t mean they will win…. They have a decent chance.”
SF Examiner.com, July 31, 2009 by Bobbie Wood
http://www.examiner.com/x-9404-SF-Progressive-Examiner~y2009m7d31-Constitutional-law-scholar-on-naturalborn-issue-No-truth-to-that-claim
According to Mr. Choper, there is no truth to the claim that President Obama is not a natural born citizen even if his father was Kenyan. Mr. Choper cited the 14th Amendment, Section 1, as establishing that all individuals born on US soil are citizens regardless of the nationality of their parents.
The Washington Post, July 27, 2009 by Carrie Johnson
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/26/AR2009072602348_pf.html
Jesse Choper, a Berkeley colleague of Yoo’s, said he thinks “very highly” of his scholarship, even if they disagree on some issues. “This is not a person who goes around raging or screaming at people—quite the opposite,” Choper said.
The Recorder, July 9, 2009 by Mike McKee
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202432100661&Calif_Bill_Would_OK_OutofState_Gay_Marriages
Jesse Choper, a constitutional law expert at UC-Berkeley School of Law, said that would seem reasonable. “If the Legislature wants to say that same-sex marriages performed legally outside the state of California shall be recognized in California, then it would seem that’s a fair statute to pass,” he said. “The California Supreme Court can always come back and say, no, by constitutional amendment they are not valid anymore.”
Times-Standard, July 1, 2009 by Allison White
http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_12729896
U.C. Berkeley law professor Jesse Choper said proving the statements are defamatory depends on whether Hansen is cast as a public official or a private citizen. “If it’s an ordinary citizen, it’s much easier to prove,” he said…. The fact that the comments were made by anonymous users shouldn’t matter legally, he said. “If messages are sent out over the Internet, it doesn’t protect them from making defamatory statements,” he said.
San Francisco Chronicle, June 23, 2009 by Bob Egelko
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/06/23/MNPL18BIJJ.DTL&type=printable
“What the president said is politics. What the brief said is their position on the law,” said Jesse Choper of UC Berkeley. Still, he said, a judge who decided to reject the government’s argument could quote the president’s words. Carter, Choper mused, might say something like, “Of course it discriminates, as President Obama said.”
Contra Costa Times, June 22, 2009 by John Simerman
http://www.contracostatimes.com/news/ci_12667403?source=rss
UC Berkeley Boalt Hall School of Law professor Jesse Choper, however, said the major Supreme Court decisions have not directly addressed policies that don’t just exclude religious groups, but other activities as well.
The Daily Californian, June 18, 2009 by Zach E.J. Willaims
http://www.dailycal.org/article/105909/federal_court_lets_civil_suit_against_yoo_move_for
Advances in civil court will not likely affect other efforts from activists to force the U.S. Federal Government to hold Yoo responsible for Bush administration policies, according to Jesse Choper, Earl Warren professor of public law at Boalt Hall. “It’s symbolic (but) it could not have a substantial effect on a criminal proceeding,” he said. He added that although the court denied a motion to dismiss, Padilla still has to prove his case. “He is a long way from there,” Choper said.
San Francisco Chronicle, May 29, 2009 by Carolyn Lochhead
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/05/29/MNGF17SNET.DTL&type=printable
“She has sterling credentials,” Murray said. “She’s incredibly smart, she’s incredibly fair. I think she takes every case on its merits. She’s very rigorous in researching cases and she applies the law. The idea of her as an activist is absolutely ludicrous. In my time with her, I’ve never seen anyone more sensitive to what the law in our circuit actually required.”
Jesse Choper, a UC Berkeley constitutional law professor, said Sotomayor might take back her Berkeley words if she could, saying they were inelegantly put. “But having said that,” Choper said, “every Supreme Court justice, every human being, is the product of their own experience, their own education, their own background, their own values.”