The law professor who wrote one of the seminal "torture memos" that cleared the way for harsh and what critics call abusive and illegal interrogation techniques is safe in his job, the dean of the school says. University of California-Berkeley School of Law Dean Christopher Edley Jr. took sharp exception to Professor John Yoo’s legal analysis for the Bush administration’s Justice Department in a message posted on the school’s Web site. But Edley said the responsibility for any resulting breaches of law rested with Yoo’s clients — then-Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and President Bush.
"Yes, it does matter that Yoo was an adviser, but President Bush and his national security appointees were the deciders. Assuming one believes as I do that Professor Yoo offered bad ideas and even worse advice during his government service, that judgment alone would not warrant dismissal or even a potentially chilling inquiry," he said.
Yoo wrote a secret memo for the Pentagon dated March 14, 2003, which the Pentagon released last week under a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit. It outlines the legal justification for military interrogators to use harsh tactics against al-Qaida and Taliban detainees overseas — so long as they did not specifically intend to torture their captives. Yoo also referenced one of his earlier legal theories, now repudiated by the Justice Department: that the U.S. military was not required to observe constitutional protections against unlawful searches and seizures during domestic operations. He built upon an earlier Justice Department memo that he helped draft which narrowly defined torture, and lowered the bar for how so-called enemy combatants could be treated.
"My sense is that the vast majority of legal academics with a view of the matter disagree with substantial portions of Professor Yoo’s analyses, including a great many of his colleagues at Berkeley. If, however, this strong consensus were enough to fire or sanction someone, then academic freedom would be meaningless." While affirming Yoo’s right to continue teaching at Berkeley and practicing law, Edley said Yoo had allowed politics to triumph over law.
"What troubles me substantively with the analyses in the memoranda is that they reduce the Rule of Law to the Reign of Politics. I believe there is much more to the separation of powers than the promise of ultimate remedies like the ballot box and impeachment, even in the case of a Commander in Chief during war. And I believe that the revolution in sensibilities after 9/11 demands greater, not reduced, vigilance for constitutional rights and safeguards"…
John Yoo’s Legal Memos are surprisingly "unlegal." They are opinion pieces, and they express an opinion that is held by only a few – specifically members of the group known as the Federalist Society. While Yoo mentions some precedents in his arguments, they are not legal precedents, they are often exceptions. Were I Dean Edley, it wouldn’t be his absurd conclusions that would bother me. I would be stunned that a Professor of Constitutional Law, rather than interpreting the Constitution, seems to be judging it as faulty and changing it. Thinking of John Yoo as a lawyer is like thinking of James Dobson as a religious leader. They are both political prostitutes, masquerading as something else. John Yoo is a tenured Law Professor representing Edley’s Law School by actively misinterpreting the United States Constitution. Academic Freedom is about the right to have one’s own opinions. John Yoo didn’t take his whaky opinions to a legal conference, he secretly rendered them on demand to the government of the United States certifying them as legit.
President Bush says he knew his top national security advisors discussed and approved specific details about how high-value al Qaeda suspects would be interrogated by the Central Intelligence Agency, according to an exclusive interview with ABC News Friday.
“Well, we started to connect the dots, in order to protect the American people.” Bush told ABC News White House correspondent Martha Raddatz. “And, yes, I’m aware our national security team met on this issue. And I approved.”
“We had legal opinions that enabled us to do it. And, no, I didn’t have any problem at all trying to find out what Khalid Sheikh Mohammed knew.”
Do you think it would make a difference if the Dean thought Yoo was a willing participant in treason? It would be heartwarming to see the students at this great university protest in large numbers to this tenured professor lack of morals and destructive interpretation to the constitution that was suppose to protect our country from unlawful rulers like Bush and Cheney.