I still owe a duty of loyalty to my clients and former clients, so I cannot specify which clients I did not especially find congenial, but the cause was the same.

The government understands - every government, every administration, both parties, understands - that that power, they just don't have.

I really do think that if we had lost that case we would really live in a country that would be really quite different.

I thought that one of the things that we were losing sight of is the basic reasons that we do protect free speech and freedom of the press and the essentiality and centrality in our lives of really giving broad protection to freedom of speech and freedom of the press in America. I thought I could do that by telling stories of some of the cases that established those principles on a real life on the ground basis.

I just had the sense that at least the books that I had read about law just didn't really have enough of that.

I can tell you, having been in court today in New York, that the requests for the video outtakes have been dropped.

It just seems to be a human trait to want to protect the speech of people with whom we agree. For the First Amendment, that is not good enough. So it is really important that we protect First Amendment rights of people no matter what side of the line they are on.