The Constitution is not neutral. It was designed to take the government off the backs of people.

The association promotes a way of life, not causes; a harmony in living, not political faiths; a bilateral loyalty, not commercial or social projects. Yet it is an association for as noble a purpose as any involved in any prior decisions.

The right to revolt has sources deep in our history.

We do not sit as a superlegislature to weigh the wisdom of legislation.

The critical point is that the Constitution places the right of silence beyond the reach of government.

The 5th Amendment is an old friend and a good friend. one of the great landmarks in men's struggle to be free of tyranny, to be decent and civilized.

We are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a Supreme Being.

The Constitution is not neutral. It was designed to take the government off the backs of people.

Since when have we Americans been expected to bow submissively to authority and speak with awe and reverence to those who represent us?

Free speech is not to be regulated like diseased cattle and impure butter. The audience that hissed yesterday may applaud today, even for the same performance.

Marriage is a coming together for better or for worse, hopefully enduring, and intimate to the degree of being sacred.

It seemed to me that I had barely reached the Court when people were trying to get me off.

One who comes to the Court must come to adore, not to protest. That's the new gloss on the 1st Amendment.

Tell the FBI that the kidnappers should pick out a judge that Nixon wants back.

No patent medicine was ever put to wider and more varied use than the Fourteenth Amendment.

Common sense often makes good law.

The right to be let alone is indeed the beginning of all freedoms.

At the constitutional level where we work, 90 percent of any decision is emotional. The rational part of us supplies the reasons for supporting our predilections.

The liberties of none are safe unless the liberties of all are protected.

We who have the final word can speak softly or angrily. We can seek to challenge and annoy, as we need not stay docile and quiet.

Literature should not be suppressed merely because it offends the moral code of the censor.

As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there is a twilight when everything remains seemingly unchanged, and it is in such a twilight that we all must be most aware of change in the air - however slight - lest we become unwitting victims of darkness.

We need to be bold and adventurous in our thinking in order to survive.

The court is really the keeper of the conscience and the conscience is the Constitution.

Absolute discretion is a ruthless master. It is more destructive of freedom than any of mans other inventions.

The dominant purpose of the First Amendment was to prohibit the widespread practice of government suppression of embarrassing information.

The First Amendment makes confidence in the common sense of our people and in the maturity of their judgement the great postulate of our democracy.

Thus if the First Amendment means anything in this field it must allow protests even against the moral code that the standard of the day sets for the community. In other words literature should not be suppressed merely because it offends the moral code of the censor.

Free speech is not to be regulated like diseased cattle and impure butter. The audience...that hissed yesterday may applaud today even for the same performance.

There have always been grievances and youth has always been the agitator.

I do not know of any salvation for society except through eccentrics, misfits, dissenters, people who protest.

As a member of this court I am not justified in writing my private notions of policy into the Constitution, no matter how deeply I may cherish them or how mischievous I may deem their disregard.

The relationship between press and politician - protected by the Constitution and designed to be happily adversarial - becomes sour, raw and confrontational.

I didn't say 'former president,' I said 'president,' and I have the constitutional rights according to the constitution, including immunity from prosecution.

All the perplexities, confusion and distress in America arise, not from defects in their Constitution or Confederation, not from want of honor or virtue, so much as from the downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit and circulation.

The constitution is the ultimate custodian of social will and its making should be accorded all due diligence.

I believe in the Constitution. The Constitution says that government isn't supposed to be infusing religion into our society, and so I asked to have that upheld.

It doesn't say anywhere in the Constitution this idea of the separation of church and state.

I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.

This constitution recognises the need for social dialogue involving labour and management; it involves trade unions in the decision-making process; it has a social vision founded on social dialogue.

They will sustain the constitution and laws and institutions of the United States, and be the champions of liberty and of that constitution when its integrity shall be threatened.

But I think the possibility of a black and white society feeding each other's expertises, living harmoniously, will probably go along in fits and starts now but at least it has a great constitution now to back it up.

I deem it established, then, that the Constitution does not recognize property in man, but leaves that question, as between the states, to the law of nature and of nations.

I voted for the Defense of Marriage Act but I do not believe we should institutionalize a form of discrimination against any minority by amending the Constitution.

The Constitution is never tested during times of tranquility; it is during times of tension, turmoil, tragedy, trauma, and terrorism that it is sorely tested.

Working Americans who believe in our country and who believe in our Constitution are saying, 'Enough is enough!'

If the United States is hit with a weapon of mass destruction that inflicts large casualties, the Constitution will likely be discarded in favor of a military form of government.

They had no right, as it seems to me, to prosecute me in these Halls; nor have you the right in law or under the Constitution, as I respectfully submit, to take jurisdiction over offenses committed against them.

The whole basis of the Constitution was a restriction of power, and the whole basis of the federalist system was that there was not one sovereign centralized power from which all authority flows.