« What Does John Yoo Believe? | Main | Anybody Have a Copy of This Email? »

May 10, 2008

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

jerry

"because many people who do not know us might perhaps assume that John's work is representative of our views. As you well know, he is as much of an outlier here"

And yet we are told:

"hardworking and responsible member of our community"
"he was in complete compliance with our standards"

I fail to understand why I should not think that Yoo's work is not representative of Boalt.

Our lawyer professor also tells us why academic freedom is meaningless in a law department:

"We are not afraid to let John say what he thinks, because Chris can say what he thinks, and if I and many others are right, history will show that Chris has the better of it. Academic freedom in a nutshell."

Upon hearing this, Michael Savage renews his bid to become Dean of the J School. And Ben Stein offers to join the Physics Department, or the Biology Department, he really doesn't care which.

NE1

It's not his work that reflects poorly on Boalt--stories of loony profs abound--but that the egregiousness of it hasn't passed everyone else's thresholds for action. That said, I can think of one situation where the writer would want to remain anonymous: associate professor.

non-lawyer

Would you accept and protect a staff member who has facilitated crimes against humanity?

Berkeley: Yes, of course. We are doing so now.

Would you accept and protect a staff member who has facilitated the deaths of many, none of whom were actually found guilty of any crime?

Berkeley: Yes, of course. We are doing so now.

Would you accept and protect a staff member who has advocated an imperial presidency in violation of United States law and the US Constitution?

Berkeley: Yes, of course. We are doing so now.

Would you accept and protect a staff member who, outside of US soil, could be seized and tried for war crimes?

Berkeley: Yes, of course. We are doing so now.

Would you accept and protect a staff member who, in the absence of egregious corruption within United States government, could be seized and tried for war crimes here in the US?

Berkeley: Yes, of course. We are doing so now.

Would you accept and protect a staff member who has facilitated criminal actions known to be in violation of United States law and international treaties?

Berkeley: Yes, of course. We are doing so now.

Would you accept and protect a staff member who, ultimately, could be sentenced to life imprisonment if tried and convicted as a part of a criminal conspiracy that resulted in death.

Berkeley: Yes, of course. We are doing so now.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Pages