I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material but I know it when I see it.

The right to enjoy property without unlawful deprivation, no less that the right to speak out or the right to travel is, in truth, a "personal" right.

The dichotomy between personal liberties and property rights is a false one. Property does not have rights. People have rights.

For the Fourth Amendment protects people, not places. What a person knowingly exposes to the public, even in his own home or office, is not a subject of Fourth Amendment protection. But what he seeks to preserve as private, even in an area accessible to the public, may be constitutionally protected.

It must always be remembered that what the Constitution forbids is not all searches and seizures, but unreasonable searches and seizures.

Ethics is knowing the difference between what you have a right to do and what is right to do.

The equal protection standard of the constitution has one clear and central meaning - it absolutely prohibits invidious [repugnant] discrimination by government...Under our Constitution, any official action that treats a person differently on account of his race or ethnic origin is inherently [by nature] suspect and presumptively [probably] invalid...Under the Constitution we have, one practice in which government may never engage in the practice of racism - not even "temporarily" and not even as an "experiment."