Extended excerpt [U.S. Supreme Court decision. In this excerpt, Burger was summarizing & quoting from the 1978 First National Bank of Boston vs. Bellotti decision. Italics original to cited source.]:

“Free speech carries with it some freedom to listen. “In a variety of contexts, this Court has referred to a First Amendment right to receive information and ideas.”

Source note: Chief Justice Warren Burger delivered the Court judgment. His opinion was joined by Justices Byron White & John Paul Stevens.

Source link: Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia (2 July 1980) online via Justia: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/448/555/case.html

Extended excerpt [U.S. Supreme Court decision]:

“The facts of this case demonstrate the inadequacy of broad and general testing devices as well as the infirmity of using diplomas or degrees as fixed measures of capability. History is filled with examples of men and women who rendered highly effective performance without the conventional badges of accomplishment in terms of certificates, diplomas, or degrees. Diplomas and tests are useful servants, but Congress has mandated the commonsense proposition that they are not to become masters of reality.”

Source link: Griggs v. Duke Power Co. (8 March 1971) Decision online via FindLaw: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/401/424.html

Extended excerpt [Newspaper coverage of Burger speech]:

“Discussing prisoner rights, an issue which triggered recent prison unrest, Burger emphasized the need for athletic and recreational facilities in correctional institutions.

“If anyone is temped [sic] to regard this as ‘coddling of criminals,’ let him visit a prison and talk with inmates and staffs,” he said.

“I have visited some of the best and some of the worst prisons and I have never seen any signs of “coddling” but I have seen the terrible effects of the burden and frustrations of empty hours and a pointless existence.” (p. 5, column 2)

Source link: “Burger Feels Inmates Need Greater Voice” (8 December 1971) The Tennessean via Newspapers.com [subscription service]: https://www.newspapers.com/image/111917285

Extended excerpt: [Interview]

Chief Justice Burger: “If I were writing the Bill of Rights now there wouldn’t be any such thing as the Second Amendment.”

Charlayne Hunter-Gault: “Which says..?”

Chief Justice Burger: “That a well-regulated militia, being necessary for the defense of the State…the peoples’ rights to bear arms.” This has been the subject of one of the greatest pieces of fraud – I repeat the word fraud – on the American public by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime. Now just look at those words. There are only three lines to that Amendment. “A well-regulated militia.” If the militia, which was going to be the state army, was going to be well regulated, why shouldn’t sixteen and seventeen and eighteen or any other age persons be regulated in the use of arms the way an automobile is regulated?”

Source note: Recorded excerpt of Burger’s televised interview appears on an interview highlight compilation which also features NewsHour interviews with The Shah of Iran, Nelson Mandela, Bill Clinton, and other notable figures.

Source link: “PBS NewsHour Digitization Project Reel” (2016) online via Vimeo: https://vimeo.com/157433062

Extended excerpt [Comments in a newspaper article about judicial review & the American justice system]:

“Mr. Burger, now the chairman of the Commission on the Bicentennial of the Constitution, recalls the first ‘women’s lib’ case in 1971 (Reed v. Reed), when the court struck down a discriminatory Idaho law against appointing women as estate executors. ‘Some things are around for a hundred years – like discrimination against women – and never challenged,’ Burger says. “Then new attitudes arise.”

But, he stresses, “Judges are not appointed to reflect what people are thinking. They rule on the basis of law, not public opinion, and they should be totally indifferent to pressures of the times.”

Source link: “The Power of Judicial Review” (11 Feb 1987) Christian Science Monitor: http://www.csmonitor.com/1987/0211/zcon4.html

Extended excerpt [Address to American Bar Association members]:

“When we see costs of justice rising, when we see our standing in public esteem falling, something is wrong. If we ask the question “Who is responsible?” the answer must be: We are. I am. You are.” “The entire legal profession – lawyers, judges, law teachers – has become so mesmerized with the stimulation of the courtroom contest that we tend to forget that we ought to be healers – healers of conflicts. Doctors, in spite of astronomical medical costs, still retain a high degree of public confidence, because they are perceived as healers. Should lawyers not be healers? Healers, not warriors? Healers, not procurers? Healers, not hired guns?” (p. 66)

Source link: “The State of Justice” (12 Feb. 1984) American Bar Association Journal, via Google Books: https://books.google.com/books?id=ghLd6FgGPAAC&pg=PA66&lpg=PA66&dq=Doctors,+in+spite+of+astronomical+medical+costs,+still+retain+a+high+degree+of+public+confidence

Extended excerpt [Supreme Court decision. Concur/Dissent in Part]:

“In my view, Congress can no more ration political expression than it can religious expression; and limits on political or religious contributions and expenditures effectively curb expression in both areas. There are many prices we pay for the freedoms secured by the First Amendment; the risk of undue influence is one of them, confirming what we have long known: freedom is hazardous, but some restraints are worse.”

Source link: Buckley v. Valeo (30 Jan. 1976) Legal Information Institute (LII), Cornell University Law School: https://www.law.cornell.edu/lii/about/who_we_are

Misattibution notes: Justice Clark’s decision has been misattributed to fellow Supreme Court member Warren E. Burger.

Extended excerpt [Supreme Court Majority Ruling]:

“Further, it is no defense to urge that the religious practices here may be relatively minor encroachments on the First Amendment. The breach of neutrality that is today a trickling stream may all too soon become a raging torrent and, in the words of Madison, “it is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties.”

Source note: Justice Clark delivered the Supreme Court majority opinion in an 8-1 decision. In the decision, the justices ruled that requiring public school students to participate in school religious exercises violated their First Amendment rights of free exercise & religious expression, and the Fourteenth Amendment Establishment Clause.

Source link: Abington School District v. Schempp (17 July 1963) FindLaw.com: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/374/203.html