John Yoo frightens me in general; his view of the presidency is essentially the exact opposite of mine. Yoo argues for fewer constraints on presidential power, while I regularly argue for limited executive power. In a talk given to the Federalist society Yoo opined:
It’s “good for the president to nominate someone with his views [as attorney general]. Every subordinate should agree with his views so there is a unified approach to the law”
I too would like the executive branch to have a very consistent (and moderate) view of the law, because I think that would strengthen the rule of law a good deal. I don’t think Yoo’s position makes very much sense at all; is it really good to have the whole executive branch have a unified approach to the law if that approach changes significantly every four or eight years when a new president is elected? Wouldn’t you expect congress to have a much more time consistent median position than the President?