The law is not an end in itself, nor does it provide ends. It is preeminently a means to serve what we think is right.

We do not consecrate the flag by punishing its desecration, for in doing so, we dilute the freedom this cherished emblem represents.

More fundamentally, however, the answer to petitioners' objection is that there can be no impairment of executive power, whether on the state or federal level, where actions pursuant to that power are impermissible under the Constitution. Where there is no power, there can be no impairment of power.

If the right to privacy means anything, it is the right of the individual, married or single, to be free from unwarranted governmental intrusion.

If our free society is to endure, those who govern must recognize human dignity and accept the enforcement of constitutional limitations on their power conceived by the Framers . . . . Such recognition will not come from a technical understanding of the organs of government, or the new forms of wealth they administer. It requires something different, something deeper-a personal confrontation with the wellsprings of our society.

There is no such thing as a false idea.

The law is not an end in itself, nor does it provide ends. It is preeminently a means to serve what we think is right.