John Yoo and Jesse Choper quoted by California Magazine, Feb. 7, 2018
Yoo: “States don’t have the power to interfere with federal operation. … If the state is trying to prevent people from obeying federal law, they might be committing obstruction of justice—which is a crime.”
Choper: “For California to pass a law to regulate private citizens, telling them that if they follow federal law they’re in violation of state law—that is very different than the state simply saying, ‘We’re not going to enforce [the federal government’s] law. If you want to [enforce] it, do it yourself.’ That’s a major step that I do not think is within the state’s power.”
Jesse Choper quoted by San Francisco Chronicle, Dec. 4, 2017
Another reason to protect a president from prosecution while in office is to avoid interfering with the president’s work as the nation’s leader, said Jesse Choper. … “A good argument can be made that (those protections) disappear when he’s left office.”
Jesse Choper quoted by San Francisco Chronicle, Nov. 18, 2017
“There’s very little speech that you can compel by law,” said … Choper. “You can require an organization to give very basic information. I don’t think you can require an organization to make statements that are disputed. … Those statements (about the harmful effects of abortion) are in dispute.”
Jesse Choper quoted by California Magazine, Nov. 16, 2017
At this point, whether or not the university would eventually be allowed to restrict speakers based on cost can only be speculated, Choper says, and until such a case makes it to the Supreme Court, there’s no authoritative answer.
Jesse Choper and Leti Volpp quoted by San Francisco Chronicle, Sept. 25, 2017
Jesse Choper … said the addition of North Korea, in particular, would counter opponents’ allegations that the order is a Muslim ban. He also noted that that courts traditionally give the president considerable authority over immigration and national security.
The new order “could be challenged on the same grounds” as the previous versions, Volpp said. She described the additions of three nations as “cosmetic,” saying U.S. immigration from North Korea and Chad is minuscule.
Jesse Choper interviewed by Orlando Sentinel, Sept. 15, 2017
Jesse Choper … said universities are allowed “reasonable” restrictions on the “time, place and manner” of speech. What’s reasonable? That depends on the judge, he said. “You can find a federal district judge, or a state judge, for that matter, who will do most anything,” he said.
Jesse Choper quoted by California Magazine, Aug. 28, 2017
“It would be an uphill battle to make liability stick for any [gun-related death] if the city is in an open carry state,” Choper says. “That isn’t to say authorities shouldn’t or couldn’t try to stop [people carrying guns during demonstrations]. … All rules and laws have exceptions under extraordinary circumstances. No right, including the right to bear arms, is absolute.”
Jesse H. Choper quoted by Snopes, Aug. 18, 2017
“Free speech is not absolute; that has been true from the very beginning,” … Jesse H. Choper told us. But where one draws that line is something that does not have a clear answer. He told us that there is a real lack of definition about “what is hate speech and under what circumstances does it lose First Amendment protection.”
Jesse Choper quoted by San Francisco Chronicle, June 30, 2017
Jesse Choper, a UC Berkeley law professor and former Supreme Court law clerk, said Kennedy is “the single most powerful public official in the United States.”
Robert Cole, Jesse Choper, and Charles Weisselberg quoted by California Magazine, June 22, 2017
“Even if Trump is impeached and removed from office, you end up with President Pence,” says Cole, “and most Democrats would probably not consider that an improvement. … The Democrats should be concentrating on 2018, identifying the districts where they have a chance, and developing a positive program that engages voters. Simply being against Trump isn’t enough.”
“In fact, the only thing I see so far that could tip the scale would be if substantial evidence emerged showing he knew the Russians were working to influence the election in his favor,” says Choper. “That could either force him to resign or convince the House to impeach and the Senate to convict. Other than that—it just seems unlikely to me.”
“There has been considerable debate about whether a sitting president can be charged with criminal offenses,” says Weisselberg. “Many argue the Constitution implicitly provides impeachment as the sole process for removing a serving president. However, a president who resigns or is removed from office can then be criminally prosecuted.”