Perhaps the most striking assault on the foundations of traditional liberties is a little-known case brought to the Supreme Court by the Obama administration, Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
For thirty years, beginning with the invention of a privacy right in the Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade, the Left has been waging a systematic assault on the constitutional foundation of the nation.
Most liberals think of civil liberties as their Achilles heel. It isn't.
I firmly believe that the Constitution is the most powerful challenge to illiberal tendencies. If the Constitution is followed in letter and spirit and if the laws are made in the spirit in which Constitution was made, liberties can indeed be protected.
You do the best you can, looking at precedent, in trying to anticipate where the Supreme Court is going to draw the balance between the protection of civil liberties and protecting the national security, and in some cases, we guessed wrong.
Who needs the protection of the Bill of Rights most? The weak, the most vulnerable in society.
The right and the physical power of the people to resist injustice, are really the only securities that any people ever can have for their liberties. Practically no government knows any limit to its power but the endurance of the people.
The enemies of freedom are waging an all-out assault on the Second Amendment to the Constitution, which we have sworn to protect and defend.
Let me be clear: There is no stronger advocate for civil liberties in the Senate than myself.
There is nothing with which it is so dangerous to take liberties as liberty itself.
You watch the Supreme Court in action on these cases, and they are a conflicted court. However, when it comes to speech issues generally, the court has been protective.
No opposing quotes found.