Quote

When I went to law school, which after all was back in the dark ages, we never looked beyond our borders for precedents. As a state court judge, it never would have occurred to me to do so, and when I got to the Supreme Court, it was very much the same. We just didn't do it.

In America, we have long stood by the principle that the protections of the law are not meant just for some.

Even when laws have been written down, they ought not always to remain unaltered.

I believe an international criminal court is very much to be desired.

It's not up to the courts to invent new minorities that get special protections.

Judges need to restrict themselves to the proper resolution of the case before them. They need to avoid the temptation to set broad policy.

If we don't enforce visa laws, we basically have open borders.

You have to accept the rule of law, even when it's inconvenient, if you're going to be a country that bides by the rule of law.

The rules and principles of case law have never been treated as final truths but as working hypotheses, continually retested in those great laboratories of the law, the courts of justice. Every new case is an experiment, and if the accepted rule which seems applicable yields a result which is felt to be unjust, the rule is reconsidered.

At the moment we have a ruling class that has one law and the people the other.