Dissent and dissenters have no monopoly on freedom. They must tolerate opposition. They must accept dissent from their dissent.

In order for the State in the person of school officials to justify prohibition of a particular expression of opinion, it must be able to show that its action was caused by something more than a mere desire to avoid the discomfort and unpleasantness that always accompany an unpopular viewpoint.

For a justice of this ultimate tribunal [the U.S. Supreme Court], the opportunity for self-discovery and the occasion for self-revelation is great.

It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.

The story of man is the history, first, of the acceptance and imposition of restraints necessary to permit communal life and second, of the emancipation of the individual within that system of necessary restraints.

Needless, heedless, wanton and deliberate injury of the sort inflicted by Life's picture story is not an essential instrument of responsible journalism.

Government...may not be hostile to any religion or to the advocacy of no-religion and it may not aid, foster, or promote one religion or religious theory against another... The First Amendment mandates governmental neutrality.

Procedure is the bone structure of a democratic society. Our scheme of law affords great latitude for dissent and opposition. It compels wide tolerance not only for their expression but also for the organization of people and forces to bring about the acceptance of the dissenter's claim....We have alternatives to violence.

Judging is a lonely job in which a man is, as near as may be, an island entire.