Indeed, drawing in part on the reasoning of Verdugo-Urquidez, as well as the Supreme Court's treatment of the destruction of property for the purposes of military necessity, our Office recently concluded that the Fourth Amendment had no application to domestic military operations. See Memorandum for Alberto R. Gonzales, Counsel to the President, and William J. Haynes, II, General Counsel, Department of Defense, from John C. Yoo, Deputy Assistant Attorney General and Robert J. Delahunty, Special Counsel, Re: Authority for Use of Military Force to Combat Terrorist Activities Within the United States at 25 (Oct 23, 200 I).

Robert Delahunty? Where have I heard that name before? Was it when I said his legal reasoning was either incompetent or disingenous? Or maybe it was when I said I would be humiliated for my law school to be associated with him in any way, shape or form?

I wonder what Ivan, Yates, Eric, and Emily would do if the controversy arose today? Would they once again sign the Delahunty counter-petition, "oppos[ing] the attempt to block Mr. Delahunty's placement as a temporary professor"? Or would they agree with me that a man who gives advice like Delahunty's will be judged very harshly (if not by the law, then by history and by his contemporaries) and should be shunned by a school such as ours?