The Interest Of The People Lies In

I Do Not Believe That It Can Be Too Often Repeated That The Freedoms Of Speech, Press, Petition And Assembly Guaranteed By The First Amendment Must Be Accorded To The Ideas We Hate Or Sooner Or Later They Will Be Denied To The Ideas We Cherish. The First Banning Of An Association Because It Advocates Hated Ideas - Whether That Association Be Called A Political Party Or Not - Marks A Fateful Moment In The History Of A Free Country.

That Amendment Requires The State To Be A Neutral In Its Relations With Groups Of Religious Believers And Nonbelievers; It Does Not Require The State To Be Their Adversary. State Power Is No More To Be Used So As To Handicap Religions Than It Is To Favor Them.

In My Judgment The People Of No Nation Can Lose Their Liberty So Long As A Bill Of Rights Like Ours Survives And Its Basic Purposes Are Conscientiously Interpreted, Enforced And Respected So As To Afford Continuous Protection Against Old, As Well As New, Devices And Practices Which Might Thwart Those Purposes. I Fear To See The Consequences Of The Court's Practice Of Substituting Its Own Concepts Of Decency And Fundamental Justice For The Language Of The Bill Of Rights As Its Point Of Departure In Interpreting And Enforcing That Bill Of Rights.

The Flagrant Disregard In The Courtroom Of Elementary Standards Of Proper Conduct Should Not And Cannot Be Tolerated.

No Tax In Any Amount, Large Or Small, Can Be Levied To Support Any Religious Activities Or Institutions, Whatever They May Be Called, Or Whatever Form They May Adopt To Teach Or Practice Religion.