Quotes · Skopia

16 quotes

Compania General de Tabacos de Filipinas v. Collector of Internal Revenue · 1927

★ 6.9

Supreme Court opinion · Legal opinion · Legal writing

If there is any principle of the Constitution that more imperatively calls for attachment than any other it is the principle of free thought—not free thought for those who agree with us but freedom for the thought that we hate.

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

United States v. Schwimmer · 1929

★ 6.0

Speech

Life is painting a picture, not doing a sum.

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

1911

★ 5.3

The truth is, that the law is always approaching, and never reaching, consistency. It is forever adopting new principles from life at one end, and it always retains old ones from history at the other, which have not yet been absorbed or sloughed off. It will become entirely consistent only when it ceases to grow.

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

1880

★ 5.1

It is revolting to have no better reason for a rule of law than that so it was laid down in the time of Henry IV. It is still more revolting if the grounds upon which it was laid down have vanished long since, and the rule simply persists from blind imitation of the past.

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

1897

★ 4.3

Supreme Court opinion · Legal opinion · Legal writing

A word is not a crystal, transparent and unchanged, it is the skin of a living thought, and may vary greatly in color and content according to the circumstances and the time in which it is used.

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

Towne v. Eisner · 1918

★ 4.3

Supreme Court opinion · Legal opinion · Legal writing

It will need more than the Nineteenth Amendment to convince me that there are no differences between men and women, or that legislation cannot take those differences into account.

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

Adkins v. Children's Hospital · 1923

★ 4.3

Essay

Insanity is often the logic of an accurate mind overtasked.

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

1831

★ 3.7

Lecture

The life of the law has not been logic: it has been experience.

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

The Common Law · 1880

★ 3.7

Lecture

The law embodies the story of a nation's development through many centuries, and it cannot be dealt with as if it contained only the axioms and corollaries of a book of mathematics.

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

The Common Law · 1880

★ 3.5

Speech

The only prize much cared for by the powerful is power. The prize of the general is not a bigger tent, but command.

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

1913

★ 3.5

Supreme Court opinion · Legal opinion · Legal writing

But when men have realized that time has upset many fighting faiths, they may come to believe even more than they believe the very foundations of their own conduct that the ultimate good desired is better reached by free trade in ideas—that the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market, and that truth is the only ground upon which their wishes safely can be carried out. That at any rate, is the theory of our Constitution. It is an experiment, as all life is an experiment.

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

Abrams v. United States · 1919

★ 3.5

Supreme Court opinion · Legal opinion · Legal writing

The government ought not to use evidence obtained and only obtainable, by a criminal act...for my part I think it a less evil that some criminals could escape than that, the Government should play an ignoble part.

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

Olmstead v. United States · 1928

★ 3.5

Essay

Certainty generally is illusion, and repose is not the destiny of man.

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

1897

★ 2.0

Supreme Court opinion · Legal opinion · Dissenting opinion · Legal writing

General propositions do not decide concrete cases. The decision will depend on a judgement or intuition more subtle than any articulate major premise.

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

Lochner v. New York · 1905

★ 1.9

Supreme Court opinion · Legal opinion · Legal writing

The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic... The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent.

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

Schenck v. United States · 1919

★ 1.8

Sourced and curated.