The fact that the Constitution is sufficiently open-ended to infuriate all Americans almost equally is part of its enduring genius.

I think particularly on the left, progressives wanted more bombast and more.

On a court full of great writers, I shouldn't say full of - there have been some bad writers on the court over the years.

What's doubly, possibly triply weird about the [Donald] Trump claim is that I said something really hateful and offended an entire class of people, and in a case that actually has nothing to do with race he should still be conflicted out.

The First Aphorism of Religion Cases: Only the religious convictions of other people are weird. Yours are perfectly rational.

There's such a kind of complicated line between politics and the law and we don't sit around and say, hey, you know, what would Oliver Wendell Holmes have had to say to this.

A lot of conservative writers have twisted that argument in the conversation around Judge [Gonzalo] Curiel and said this is identity politics as played by liberals. And that I think what they're trying to say is that progressives are the first to say.