Then perhaps they could be persuaded to fire unitary laughingstock John Yoo?
Normally, I find it inappropriate to engage the David Horowitzes of the world on their McCarthyist ground. But if the UC system is comfortable rescinding an offer they’ve made to Edwin Chemerinsky, then it seems fair to ask them to fire the lawyer who has elicited–by far–the most controversy in recent years (and that’s coming from someone who lives in Jeffrey Fieger‘s state)–John Yoo.
After all, Jack Goldsmith makes it pretty clear in his book. John Yoo’s opinions–which served as the basis for the dismantling of significant parts of our Constitution–were, um, "flimsy." And that’s coming from a fellow conservative.
Chemerinsky may be liberal, but he’s not a "flimsy" liberal. You’d think a strong law school like Boalt Hall would be embarrassed about having Professor Flimsy Yoo floating around its halls; if they want to employ a lawyer who shredded the Constitution, they could at least look for one whose opinions were rigorous.
So perhaps the UC Regents, having set this precedent, might use the precedent to rid the UC system of its biggest embarrassment, Flimsy Yoo.