The Indispensible Judicial Requisite Is Intellectual Humility.

It Is Easy To Make Light Of Insistence On Scrupulous Regard For The Safeguards Of Civil Liberties When Invoked On Behalf Of The Unworthy. It Is Too Easy. History Bears Testimony That By Such Disregard Are The Rights Of Liberty Extinguished, Heedlessly At First, Then Stealthily, And Brazenly In The End.

The Eternal Struggle In The Law Between Constancy And Change Is Largely A Struggle Between History And Reason, Between Past Reason And Present Needs.

No Judge Writes On A Wholly Clean Slate.

For The Highest Exercise Of Judicial Duty Is To Subordinate One's Personal Pulls And One's Private Views To The Law Of Which We Are All Guaradians - Those Impersonal Convictions That Made A Society A Civilized Community, And Not The Victims Of Personal Rule.

Ours Is An Accusatorial, And Not An Inquisitorial, System - A System In Which The State Must Establish Guilt By Evidence Independently And Freely Secured, And May Not, By Coercion, Prove Its Charge Against An Accused Out Of His Own Mouth.