WIST Quotations

Douglas, William O. -- (Attributed)

Dave — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 09:32:47 +0000

Since when have we Americans been expected to bow submissively to authority and speak with awe and reverence to those who represent us?

William O. Douglas (1898–1980) American jurist, US Supreme Court justice (1939–75)
(Attributed)

Statement on arrests of protesters for disorderly conduct; recalled on his retirement (12 Nov 1975)

Douglas, William O. -- An Almanac of Liberty (15 Feb 1954)

Dave — Wed, 31 Jul 2013 20:52:57 +0000

The Fifth Amendment is an old friend, and a good one. It is one of the great landmarks in man’s struggle to be free of tyranny, to be decent and civilized. It is our way to escape torture. It protects man against any form of Inquisition. It is part of our respect for the dignity of man.

William O. Douglas (1898–1980) American jurist, US Supreme Court justice (1939–75)
An Almanac of Liberty (15 Feb 1954)

Douglas, William O. -- Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 US 470 (1965) (7 Jun 1965)

Dave — Sun, 01 Feb 2004 16:00:00 +0000

Marriage is a coming together for better or for worse, hopefully enduring, and intimate to the degree of being sacred.

William O. Douglas (1898–1980) American jurist, US Supreme Court justice (1939–75)
Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 US 470 (1965) (7 Jun 1965)

Douglas, William O. -- Lambert v. California (1958)

Dave — Sun, 01 Feb 2004 16:00:00 +0000

Living in Los Angeles is not blameworthy per se.

William O. Douglas (1898–1980) American jurist, US Supreme Court justice (1939–75)
Lambert v. California (1958)

Douglas, William O. -- Points of Rebellion, ch. 1 “How America Views Dissent” (1969)

Dave — Sat, 28 Feb 2026 23:54:41 +0000

Big Brother in the form of an increasingly powerful government and in an increasingly powerful private sector will pile the records high with reasons why privacy should give way to national security, to law and order, to efficiency of operations, to scientific advancement, and the like.

William O. Douglas (1898–1980) American jurist, US Supreme Court justice (1939–75)
Points of Rebellion, ch. 1 “How America Views Dissent” (1969)
(Source)

Douglas, William O. -- Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476, 512, dissenting opinion (1957)

Dave — Thu, 29 Jul 2021 14:32:19 +0000

Any test that turns on what is offensive to the community’s standards is too loose, too capricious, too destructive of freedom of expression to be squared with the First Amendment. Under that test, juries can censor, suppress, and punish what they don’t like, provided the matter relates to “sexual impurity” or has a tendency “to excite lustful thoughts”. This is community censorship in one of its worst forms. It creates a regime where in the battle between the literati and the Philistines, the Philistines are certain to win.

William O. Douglas (1898–1980) American jurist, US Supreme Court justice (1939–75)
Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476, 512, dissenting opinion (1957)
(Source)

Douglas, William O. -- Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476, 513, dissenting opinion (1957)

Dave — Tue, 24 May 2016 13:28:22 +0000

Thus, if the First Amendment guarantee of freedom of speech and press is to mean anything in this field, it must allow protests even against the moral code that the standard of the day sets for the community. In other words, literature should not be suppressed merely because it offends the moral code of the censor.

William O. Douglas (1898–1980) American jurist, US Supreme Court justice (1939–75)
Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476, 513, dissenting opinion (1957)
(Source)

Douglas, William O. -- Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476, 514, dissenting opinion (1957)

Dave — Mon, 17 Oct 2005 19:23:59 +0000

I would give the broad sweep of the First Amendment full support. I have the same confidence in the ability of our people to reject noxious literature as I have in their capacity to sort out the true from the false in theology, economics, or any other field.

William O. Douglas (1898–1980) American jurist, US Supreme Court justice (1939–75)
Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476, 514, dissenting opinion (1957)
(Source)

Douglas, William O. -- Roth vs. United States, 354 U.S. 476, dissenting opinion (1957)

Dave — Sun, 01 Feb 2004 16:00:00 +0000

Government should be concerned with anti-social conduct, not with utterances.

William O. Douglas (1898–1980) American jurist, US Supreme Court justice (1939–75)
Roth vs. United States, 354 U.S. 476, dissenting opinion (1957)

Douglas, William O. -- Roth vs. United States, 354 U.S. 476, dissenting opinion (1957)

Dave — Sun, 01 Feb 2004 16:00:00 +0000

The right to be let alone is indeed the beginning of all freedom.

William O. Douglas (1898–1980) American jurist, US Supreme Court justice (1939–75)
Roth vs. United States, 354 U.S. 476, dissenting opinion (1957)

Douglas, William O. -- The Court Years, 1939-1975 (1980)

Dave — Fri, 23 May 2008 11:53:13 +0000

At the constitutional level where we work, ninety percent of any decision is emotional. The rational part of us supplies the reasons for supporting our predilections.

William O. Douglas (1898–1980) American jurist, US Supreme Court justice (1939–75)
The Court Years, 1939-1975 (1980)

Comment to Justice Potter Stewart on the arrest of Vietnam War veterans during a peaceful protest on the steps of the Supreme Court building.

Douglas, William O. -- The Nieman Reports, vol. 7, no. 1, “The One Un-Amercan Act” (Jan. 1953)

Dave — Sun, 01 Feb 2004 16:00:00 +0000

Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions. It is the one un-American act that could most easily defeat us.

William O. Douglas (1898–1980) American jurist, US Supreme Court justice (1939–75)
The Nieman Reports, vol. 7, no. 1, “The One Un-Amercan Act” (Jan. 1953)

Douglas, William O. -- United States v. Ballard, 322 U.S. 78 (1944), majority opinion

Dave — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 10:32:26 +0000

The Fathers of the Constitution were not unaware of the varied and extreme views of religious sects, of the violence of disagreement among them, and of the lack of any one religious creed on which all men would agree. They fashioned a charter of government which envisaged the widest possible toleration of conflicting views. Man’s relation to his God was made no concern of the state. He was granted the right to worship as he pleased and to answer to no man for the verity of his religious views. The religious views espoused by respondents might seem incredible, if not preposterous, to most people. But if those doctrines are subject to trial before a jury charged with finding their truth or falsity, then the same can be done with the religious beliefs of any sect.

William O. Douglas (1898–1980) American jurist, US Supreme Court justice (1939–75)
United States v. Ballard, 322 U.S. 78 (1944), majority opinion

Full text.

Douglas, William O. -- Dissent, Kingsley Books, Inc. v. Brown, 354 U.S. 436, 447 (1957)

Dave — Mon, 05 May 2008 10:28:49 +0000

Free speech is not to be regulated like diseased cattle and impure butter. The audience (in this case the judge or jury) that hissed yesterday may applaud today, even for the same performance.

William O. Douglas (1898–1980) American jurist, US Supreme Court justice (1939–75)
Dissent, Kingsley Books, Inc. v. Brown, 354 U.S. 436, 447 (1957)

The court ruled 5-4 to allow banning the sale of obscene books.

Douglas, William O. -- Dissent, Public Utilities Commission of the District of Columbia v. Pollack, 343 U.S. 451 (1952) (

Dave — Fri, 02 May 2008 10:55:18 +0000

The right to be let alone is indeed the beginning of all freedoms.

William O. Douglas (1898–1980) American jurist, US Supreme Court justice (1939–75)
Dissent, Public Utilities Commission of the District of Columbia v. Pollack, 343 U.S. 451 (1952) (

The 7-1 ruling held that a streetcar company's playing of the radio was constitutional, and that the PUC could regulate same.

Douglas, William O. -- Majority opinion, United States v. Ballard, 322 U.S. 78 (1944)

Dave — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 10:29:19 +0000

Freedom of thought, which includes freedom of religious belief, is basic in a society of free men. It embraces the right to maintain theories of life and of death and of the hereafter which are rank heresy to followers of the orthodox faiths. Heresy trials are foreign to our Constitution. Men may believe what they cannot prove. They may not be put to the proof of their religious doctrines or beliefs. Religious experiences which are as real as life to some may be incomprehensible to others.

William O. Douglas (1898–1980) American jurist, US Supreme Court justice (1939–75)
Majority opinion, United States v. Ballard, 322 U.S. 78 (1944)

Full text.

Douglas, William O. -- Speech to Young Lawyers Section of the Washington State Bar Association (10 Sep. 1976)

Dave — Sun, 01 Feb 2004 16:00:00 +0000

As nightfall does not come all at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there is a twilight. And it is in such twilight that we all must be aware of change in the air — however slight — lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness.

William O. Douglas (1898–1980) American jurist, US Supreme Court justice (1939–75)
Speech to Young Lawyers Section of the Washington State Bar Association (10 Sep. 1976)