Victoria Roberts Quotes

No one should have to choose between their constitutional rights and providing for their families.

We cannot afford to walk down that dangerous path of government overstepping its boundaries into the most personal parts of our lives.

Judge Roberts has assured me personally that he has a healthy respect for precedent and the hard-won rights of Americans.

Let me be clear about this. I don't have a drug problem. I have a police problem.

As long as government is allowed to collect all Internet data, the perceived exigency will drive honest civil servants to reach more broadly and deeply into our networked lives.

Civil libertarians have raised concerns that some of the Patriot Act's provisions infringe on Constitutional rights. Those concerns are not supported by the facts.

This right to privacy ... doesn't exist in my opinion in the United States Constitution, this right that was created, it was created in Griswold–Griswold was the contraceptive case–and abortion. And now we're just extending it out. And the further you extend it out, the more ...this freedom actually intervenes and affects the family. You say, 'Well, it's my individual freedom.' Yes, but it destroys the basic unit of our society because it condones behavior that's antithetical to strong healthy families. Whether it's polygamy, whether it's adultery, where it's sodomy, all of those things, are antithetical to a healthy, stable, traditional family.

The Constitution is not the only way we preserve rights in America. We have the common law and political action.

There is no past invasion of our liberties which by its nature could not happen again. Without our constant vigilance, everything that has happened before will happen again.

The privacy and dignity of our citizens are being whittled away by sometimes imperceptible steps. Taken individually, each step may be of little consequence. But when viewed as a whole, there begins to emerge a society quite unlike any we have seen – a society in which government may intrude into the secret regions of a [person's] life.

The real victim of the war on drugs might be the Constitutional rights of the American people.

Americans don’t need a big government to read their e-mail and track what else they do

This commonwealth does upon the most deliberate reconsideration declare, that the said alien and sedition laws, are in their opinion, palpable violations of the said constitution

unconstitutional, unnecessary, extrajudicial

The law is sawdust that had already been chewed by a thousand mouths.

There is no fear exception to the 4th Amendment of the Constitution.

Their problem was how to adapt English principles and precedents to the new conditions of American life.

The NSA has shown, time and time again, it will seize on any wiggle room in the law .

no court has ever authorized what the government now seeks, no law supports such unlimited and sweeping use of the judicial process, and the Constitution forbids it.

The 4th Amendment has been a wall between a free society and overzealous police action.

The fourth amendment specifically was designed to prohibit general warrants. How could collecting every piece of phone data be perceived as anything but a general warrant?

When you're allowing the Executive Branch to deprive somebody of a constitutional liberty without any process, that is something that affects all Americans because that's a precedent that can be used.

If we set the precedent that a government can use their royal prerogative to take away people's human rights, that is taking us into a very dangerous political environment.

I always knew it'd be difficult to balance the right of privacy and the right of free speech. I think that is a tension that we've seen in court case after court case and law after law. And we always strive to find that right balance.

Whatever your partisan affiliation, it is worth considering the overarching constitutional principles involved in any given Supreme Court precedent.