The Wall Street Journal, January 6, 2012 by John Yoo
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204720204577128610335846568.html?KEYWORDS=Berkeley

War is either such an evil in itself that the United States should withdraw from its dominant world position or greater causes—such as advancing human freedom—can make war necessary.

-National Review Online, January 5, by John Yoo
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/287264/richard-cordray-use-and-abuse-executive-power-john-yoo

It is up to the Senate to decide when it is in session or not, and whether it feels like conducting any real business or just having senators sitting around on the floor reading the papers. The president cannot decide the legitimacy of the activities of the Senate any more than he could for the other branches, and vice versa.

-San Francisco Chronicle, January 8, 2012 by Debra J. Saunders
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2012/01/06/INU21MK95E.DTL

The Constitution, of course, gives the president the power to make appointments during Senate recesses. Technically, however, the Senate was in session…. “He’s poisoning the well,” observed John Yoo, UC Berkeley law school professor and former Bush administration attorney. Worse: “This is going on when his party is in charge.”

-National Review, January 9, 2012 by John Yoo
http://aei.org/article/politics-and-public-opinion/judicial/how-to-end-judicial-supremacy/

Conservatives should agree that the power of judicial review does not confer a bonus of judicial supremacy.

National Review, December 31, 2011 by John Yoo
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/286953/unavoidable-challenge-john-yoo

If the International Atomic Energy Agency’s November report is accurate, Iran will soon join the ranks of the world’s nuclear powers.  Because of the Obama administration’s reluctance to confront this looming threat, others such as the Republican presidential candidates must begin preparing the case for a military strike to destroy Iran’s nuclear program.

The Boston Globe, November 4, 2011 by Alex Beam
http://articles.boston.com/2011-11-04/lifestyle/30360333_1_john-yoo-law-professor-war-crimes

“Killing an American citizen with a drone missile without any effort to arrest him and without any imminent threat of attack on the US seems to me a far worse deprivation of civil liberties than waterboarding three undisputed top Al Qaeda leaders.”

Wall Street Journal, October 21, 2011 by John Yoo
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204485304576642963032597504.html?KEYWORDS=Berkeley

In his first two decades on the bench, Justice Thomas has established himself as the original Constitution’s greatest defender against elite efforts at social engineering. His stances for limited government and individual freedom make him the left’s lightning rod and the tea party’s intellectual godfather.

Worcester Telegram, October 20, 2011 by Dave Greenslit
http://www.telegram.com/article/20111020/NEWS/110209168/1003/NEWS03

A key, and controversial, member of the Bush administration said last night that Osama bin Laden should have been captured rather than killed….”It’s a lot easier to kill them than capture them,” Mr. Yoo said of bin Laden and other terrorists who have been killed, many by drone strikes, while Barack Obama has been president.

-The Wall Street Journal, October 3, 2011 by John Yoo
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204226204576603114226847494.html

The Yemeni-American cleric killed by a U.S. drone strike on Friday was linked to the attempted bombing of a Northwest Airlines flight over Detroit in 2009, the shooting spree at Fort Hood in Texas that killed 13 that same year, and the near-miss car bombing of Times Square in 2010. Yet, from the howls on the left, you would never know that President Barack Obama had won another victory in the war on terror.

-San Francisco Chronicle, October 11, 2011 by Debra J. Saunders
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2011/10/10/EDQO1LFNHL.DTL

The Obama White House has failed to make its own snuff memo public. The Times story is based on a leak. That Times story must have felt like deja vu all over again to UC Berkeley law Professor John Yoo…. “I’m glad they’re hypocrites,” Yoo told me.

San Francisco Chronicle, September 22, 2011 by Debra J. Saunders
http://blog.sfgate.com/djsaunders/2011/09/22/judge-vaughn-walkers-personal-prop/

UC Berkeley law professor John Yoo believes that proponents of cameras in courtrooms might want to consider alternate scenarios: “Would people think that we should allow the televising of testimony by victims in rape trials?  I would think not. Or should we allow Southern courts during the Civil Rights protest era to publish the lists of all NAACP members? The Supreme Court said that the risk of retaliation outweighed the right to publicize everything in all cases.”

-The Wall Street Journal, September 6, 2011 by John Yoo
http://www.aei.org/article/104085

Individual freedom emerged from the decade stronger than before. The government did not censor the media, sabotage political opposition or mobilize the economy. No dictatorship arose…. Meanwhile, new technologies and social networking have created an expanding space for political activity and organization unlike anything in our history.

-The New York Times, September 7, 2011 by Adam Liptak
www.nytimes.com/2011/09/07/us/sept-11-reckoning/civil.html?_r=2&scp=1&sq=Berkeley&st=nyt

“If you look at it historically,” said Professor Yoo, “you might say, ‘I can’t believe we’re at war,’ when you see how much speech is going on. Civil liberties are far more protected than what we’ve seen in past wars.”

-National Law Journal, September 9, 2011 by Karen Sloan
http://bit.ly/qLqUOP

Yoo said that despite the concerns for civil liberties, political speech and organizing have proliferated. “I think civil liberties have grown in the last 10 years, primarily because the government has stayed out of the way,” he said.

-Legal Week, September 15, 2011 by Tony Mauro
http://www.legalweek.com/legal-week/analysis/2108918/impact-affecting-legal-market

“I do not think that the rule of law suffered because of 9/11, though the phrase means different things to different people.” The University of California, Berkeley School of Law professor adds: “We were confronted by a wholly new kind of enemy and our legal system over time responded by adapting wartime principles to it.”

San Francisco Chronicle, September 2, 2011 by Joe Garofoli
http://articles.sfgate.com/2011-09-02/news/30104442_1_government-contract-liberals-president-obama

UC Berkeley law Professor John Yoo, writing recently in a legal journal published by the conservative American Enterprise Institute, said the order “opens the door for retaliation against those not supporting the administration politically.”

-San Francisco Chronicle Politics Blog (Video), August 27, 2011 by Joe Garofoli
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/nov05election/detail?entry_id=96286

“I think with Libya, I for one want to give President Obama the credit for involving us in the war, using American air assets to help push Gaddafi out of office and overthrow the regime…. I wish he’d just done it faster and harder because I think he could have ended the war quicker and given the United States a lot more influence in post-war reconstruction.”

-San Francisco Chronicle, August 28, 2011 by Joe Garofoli and Carla Marinucci
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/08/27/MNI11KSJL0.DTL&type=politics

In San Francisco at the Young Republicans gathering, UC Berkeley law Professor Yoo … was the target of two dozen demonstrators. Inside, Yoo shrugged them off…. “Any Republican that can survive in the Bay Area or Berkeley and even California … are going to be the few, the proud—but they are going to be the best warriors for the conservative movement,” he said

The Associated Press, August 22, 2011 by Justin Pritchard
http://bit.ly/pIaLGa

“What strikes me about the period after 9/11 is, I think we’ve had an amazing flourishing of information and speech,” said John Yoo, a law professor at the University of California, Berkeley, who as a Department of Justice attorney helped develop the Bush administration’s program of aggressive interrogation techniques. Yoo also conceded, “You’re going to see individual programs where bureaucrats muck things up and make sometimes silly decisions. It’s inherent in bureaucracy.”

San Jose Mercury News, August 7, 2011 by Howard Mintz
http://www.mercurynews.com/crime-courts/ci_18635058

But Liu also had strong support, even from conservatives such as Kenneth Starr. John Yoo, a colleague and controversial former Bush administration lawyer, said Liu was “a good nomination for a Democratic president” and is convinced he’ll make a “fine justice” on the state Supreme Court.

Another colleague, law professor David Sklansky, was troubled by the attacks on Liu’s judgment and temperament, which is widely described as unflappable. “He’s exceptionally fair-minded,” Sklansky said.

-Inside Higher Ed, June 21, 2011 by Kevin Kiley
http://bit.ly/lWKsG7

John Yoo … argued in a blog post that these law schools are simply trying to protect the value of the degree by making it more scarce. “Education is a product in the market, like any other,” he wrote. “The producers (law schools) sell a service (a legal education) at a price (tuition) to consumers (students). If there is an oversupply of the product, or the demand falls, then the price should drop and eventually the quantity will fall until the market clears.”

-The Wall Street Journal, June 21, 2011 by Patrick G. Lee
http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2011/06/21/the-slightly-shrinking-legal-academy/?KEYWORDS=Berkeley

Given the shrinking demand for law school education – or, as Yoo would put it, a high-priced product in oversupply – it only makes sense that the “quantity will fall until the market clears,” Yoo concludes.

-The Wall Street Journal, June 17, 2011 by John Yoo
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304186404576389474268093278.html

By accusing President Barack Obama of violating the War Powers Resolution, House Republicans are abandoning their party’s longstanding position that the Constitution allows the executive to use force abroad, subject to Congress’s control over funding. Sadly, they’ve fallen victim to the siren song of short-term political gain.

-The Heritage Foundation Pt I, June 20, 2011 by John Yoo and James C. Ho
http://bit.ly/llpRFl

Much of the debate over the power to initiate hostilities focuses on understanding the meaning of the words, “declare War.” Supporters of presidential authority contend that the Founders were well aware of the long British practice of undeclared wars. They assert that the Constitution likewise does not require formal war declarations for the President to authorize hostilities as a matter of domestic constitutional power.

-The Heritage Foundation Pt II, June 20, 2011 by John Yoo and James C. Ho
http://bit.ly/m9dGgr

Few constitutional issues have been so consistently and heatedly debated by legal scholars and politicians in recent years as the distribution of war powers between Congress and the President. As a matter of history and policy, it is generally accepted that the executive takes the lead in the actual conduct of war.

National Review, May 27, 2011 by John Yoo
http://bit.ly/la34D0

Our most critical need in that war is intelligence. But policies put into place by the Obama administration during the last two years have retarded and even reversed the progress made since 9/11. Obama’s policies on detention, interrogation, and the trial of terrorists are driving us to kill rather than capture high-value al-Qaeda leaders. While bin Laden’s death was a victory, we lost an even greater intelligence opportunity.

The Wall Street Journal, May 20, 2011 by John C. Yoo and Robert J. Delahunty
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703509104576327220508314168.html

Attorney General Eric Holder’s Justice Department is arguing that the War Powers Resolution doesn’t apply because the Libyan intervention is too “small” to constitute a “war” under the Constitution. This will come as a surprise to Moammar Gadhafi, who has escaped several attempts on his life, not to mention the Libyans killed by U.S. strikes.

-National Review Online, May 2, 2011 by John Yoo
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/266271/bin-laden-no-more-nro-symposium?page=6

The majority of the credit for the operation that killed Osama bin Laden goes to the Obama administration. But it is also a vindication of the Bush administration’s terrorism policies and shows that success comes from continuing those policies, not rejecting them.

-The Wall Street Journal, May 4, 2011 by John Yoo
http://on.wsj.com/mR5NMb

According to current and former administration officials, CIA interrogators gathered the initial information that ultimately led to bin Laden’s death…. President George W. Bush, not his successor, constructed the interrogation and warrantless surveillance programs that produced this week’s actionable intelligence.

-National Public Radio, May 6, 2011 by NPR Staff
http://www.npr.org/2011/05/06/136055311/former-bush-official-on-using-force-to-find-bin-laden

I think that this administration has a strong preference not to capture any al-Qaida leaders and would rather kill them…. However, I think it’s much better for our national security if we could capture them—as we used to—and interrogate them in order to build our mosaic of intelligence on the al-Qaida network. In fact, it’s precisely those earlier captures and interrogations, back in the first years after 9/11, that produced the intelligence that eventually allowed us to find the couriers that led us to bin Laden himself.

-USA Today, May 9, 2011 by John Yoo
http://usat.ly/mJYRov

We should not forget what made the operation possible: President Bush’s counterterrorism policies. Obama administration sources confirm that the coercive interrogation of three al-Qaeda leaders identified the courier who led the CIA to bin Laden.

The Wall Street Journal, April 27, 2011 by John Yoo and David Marston
http://on.wsj.com/ikTYlo

Suppose that during the civil rights movement segregationist governors ordered all state contractors to disclose their political donations in an attempt to expose civil rights supporters to harassment and retaliation. The Supreme Court would have had none of it.

The Wall Street Journal, March 5, 2011 by John Yoo
http://on.wsj.com/gkyVHs (registration required; go to H:\Law School in the News\In the News 2011\News Clips for article)

It should come as no surprise that an administration dominated by academic thinking on Iraq is making a fetish of international law in Libya. This pious elevation of international law over American national interests means that more innocent civilians will die and authoritarian regimes will last longer.