and received the pallbearer award for excellence in legal scholarship and teaching for the federalist society for law and public policy and testified before the judiciary committee's of the senate and the house and has advised the state of florida constitutional issues and is the author of three books. the powers of war and peace subtitled the constitution of foreign affairs after 9/11. war by other means, and insider's account of the war on terror. and crisis in command, history of executive power from george washington to george w. bush. please join me in welcoming professor yoo. [applause] >> shame on you! what you doing here? shame on heritage foundation! you don't deserve to be here! ten years later america undermine civil liberties! how dare you be here in public! get out of here and shame on you, heritage foundation! [applause] >> the speaker just speaking does not represent the heritage foundation. >> i would like to thank ed who is a graduate of berkeley law school for making me feel at home. bring back some of his son memories of his time at berkeley as well. i would like to thank e

has received the paul bader award for excellence in local scholarship and teaching from the federalist society for law and public policy. he has also testified before the jew dish committees of the senate and the house, and has advised the state of california on constitutional issues. he is the author of three books, "the powers of war and peace. the constitution and foreign affairs after 9/11. wow wow, "war by other means "and "crisis in command" the history of executive power from george washington to george bush, join me in welcoming professor yoo. >> shame on heritage foundation. you don't deserve to be here. you are wrong. ten years later america is undermining civil liberties. how dare you even be here in public. get out of here and shame on you. heritage foundation. [applause] >> i was just going to say the speaker just speaking does not represent the heritage foundation. >> i'd like to thank ed, who is a graduate of berkeley law school, for making me feel at home. [laughter] >> brings back some of his own memorieses of his time at berkeley as well. i want to thank you for inviting me t

has received the paul beaver award for excellence and legal scholarship and teaching from the federalist society for law and public policy indus testified before the judiciary committee's between the senate and the house and has advised the state of california on constitutional issues and is the author of three looks, the power of war and peace subtitled the constitution in foreign affairs after 9/11. war by a other means, an insider's account of the war on to your coming and crisis in command, the history of excessive power from george washington to george w. bush. please join me in welcoming professor yoo. [applause] >> what are you doing here? shame on heritage foundation. you don't deserve to be here. you are wrong. ten years later [inaudible] how dare you even be here in public? get out of here and shame on you, heritage foundation. >> the right to free speech, john. [applause] >> i was going to say the speaker just speaking does not represent the heritage foundation. [laughter] >> i would like to thank ed who is a graduate of berkeley law school for making me feel at home. [laughter] bring

federalist form of government. and it can affect -- it will affect our entire -- our entire society, our entire, our government. and that's not what our founding fathers intended. >> and, you know, when you look ahead to the supreme court, and you have invested so much in this fight personally, how do you feel about the chances? what do you think is going to happen once it gets there? >> well, you know, we are very hopeful right now. we have the best opinion in the country. you know, you have a majority of the states saying that this is unconstitutional. you can't do this. the 11th circuit has agreed with us in a bipartisan decision. and we feel very confident that it is unconstitutional and we will prevail. i'm not going to predict the numbers. that's up to the court. but, you know, these justices are going to do the right thing and that's why we are so pleased that it will hopefully get to them this term, they will hear the case because it's in the best interests of every american to have this case resolved as soon as possible. >> boy, it's going to be something if this is before the court kind of in the same

but ask, why did those words mean to the society that adopted them? so i will use the federalistrs, the writings of madison, but i willnd jay, not use it because they were the drafters of the constitution. those papers to show what those words meant to the society that adopted. that is the same thing i do with legislation. what do those words mean? what is the fair understanding of them? once i find that, that is my answer, and that understanding does not change. for example, whether the death penalty is proscribed by the eighth amendment, which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. the death penalty may be a very bad idea, but no american ever voted to adopt a constitutional provision that eliminated it, that eliminated that as an option. the living constitutionalists will say times have changed and it is up to meet to decide what is cruel and unusual punishment. that is a constitution and has no bite if the constitution means whatever we would like to mean today. why have a constitution? you don't need a constitution for that. all you need is a legislature. they will express

society that adopted them? and so, i will use, i will use the federalist papers, the writings of madison, hamilton and j., but i won't use it because they were the drafters of the constitution. j. was not one of the drafters. those papers to show what those words meant to the society that adopted them. and that the same thing i do with legislation. what do those words mean, what's that their understanding of them. and once i find that, that's my answer. and that understanding does not change, so for example, whether the death penalty as prescribed, is proscribed by the eighth amendment which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. death penalty may be a bad idea but no, no american ever voted to adopt a constitutional provision that eliminate it as an option. so, you know, now, the living constitution will say, times have changed and it's up to me to decide what's going on in unusual punishment. that's a constitution that has no bite. if the constitution means whatever we would like it to me today, why have the constitution? you don't need one for that. all you need is a legislature. they will express -- in fac