I think that the proposed constitution is one of the European legal documents with the strongest social dimension I have seen since I began following European issues.

We believe that the European Union is facing a truly historic choice.

There have been major disagreements within the European Union.

This constitution recognises the need for social dialogue involving labour and management; it involves trade unions in the decision-making process; it has a social vision founded on social dialogue.

The Republic is open and tolerant but also knows how and when to be firm and make its values respected.

It's important to show that, while authorizing the demonstrations and promoting diversity of opinion, the Republic can't allow itself to be undermined from within.

I believe that transatlantic relations are very important and that President Bush's visit to Brussels, in a few days, will have a major impact on that.

It's a different outlook, and one that I understand. When you are a former member of the Warsaw Pact, when you have lived behind the Berlin Wall, when you have experienced the communist systems that existed in these countries, for them, the West represents hope.

We feel an enormous sense of gratitude towards the American people.

We must stress that the euro has been beneficial to the European Union because, otherwise, in this context of international turmoil, every country would have to devalue their currencies.

I think that the proposed constitution is one of the European legal documents with the strongest social dimension I have seen since I began following European issues.

I tell fundamentalists that there is no question of them attacking our Republic's foundations.

Let them be reassured, it has never been one of our intentions to ban religion in society, but solely to protect the national education system from any conspicuous display of religious affiliation.

Europe started out with six countries; three small countries and three large countries.

We would like UN resolutions to be enforced, including on Iraq.

We have come a long way in terms of foreign policy.

A country like France now does two-thirds of its trade within the euro zone.

Obviously, there is diversity, but Europe is a union of diversity.

We shall say clearly that any symbol conspicuously displaying religious affiliation in school is prohibited.

Prohibiting a visible religious sign, which isn't a manifestation of militancy, would look like a fight against religions.

I was a Member of the European Parliament for a period of time and I saw a lot of European laws and treaties.

I am a believer, but I affirm that in public buildings the law of the Republic overrides religious rules.

It's true that the question of Iraq divided Europe.

France has a very important relationship with Germany. But that does not mean that we agree about everything or that two of our universities or companies are not going to compete.

The Europe we are in the process of building is the Europe of the 21st century; it's not the Europe of the 20th century.

The United States, for a French citizen, is a friend, an ally, to whom we owe, along with most Europeans, our freedom.

What's very important is that we build a space that matters in the world, one that operates according to democratic rules, and that small and large countries enjoy a good relationship.

But the Republic has its rules and it must not tolerate any abuse of them.

When I see the cultural diversity that exists today, I feel that we must defend it, and we need Europe, because otherwise we are going to live in a society with a single model, the Anglo-American model.

I think that we must come together progressively, with the British, the Germans, the Spanish, the Italians and with the new members of the European Union, we must make an effort to forge closer links.

As a member of this court I am not justified in writing my private notions of policy into the Constitution, no matter how deeply I may cherish them or how mischievous I may deem their disregard.

The relationship between press and politician - protected by the Constitution and designed to be happily adversarial - becomes sour, raw and confrontational.

I didn't say 'former president,' I said 'president,' and I have the constitutional rights according to the constitution, including immunity from prosecution.

All the perplexities, confusion and distress in America arise, not from defects in their Constitution or Confederation, not from want of honor or virtue, so much as from the downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit and circulation.

The constitution is the ultimate custodian of social will and its making should be accorded all due diligence.

I believe in the Constitution. The Constitution says that government isn't supposed to be infusing religion into our society, and so I asked to have that upheld.

It doesn't say anywhere in the Constitution this idea of the separation of church and state.

I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.

This constitution recognises the need for social dialogue involving labour and management; it involves trade unions in the decision-making process; it has a social vision founded on social dialogue.

They will sustain the constitution and laws and institutions of the United States, and be the champions of liberty and of that constitution when its integrity shall be threatened.

But I think the possibility of a black and white society feeding each other's expertises, living harmoniously, will probably go along in fits and starts now but at least it has a great constitution now to back it up.

I deem it established, then, that the Constitution does not recognize property in man, but leaves that question, as between the states, to the law of nature and of nations.

I voted for the Defense of Marriage Act but I do not believe we should institutionalize a form of discrimination against any minority by amending the Constitution.

The Constitution is never tested during times of tranquility; it is during times of tension, turmoil, tragedy, trauma, and terrorism that it is sorely tested.

Working Americans who believe in our country and who believe in our Constitution are saying, 'Enough is enough!'

If the United States is hit with a weapon of mass destruction that inflicts large casualties, the Constitution will likely be discarded in favor of a military form of government.

They had no right, as it seems to me, to prosecute me in these Halls; nor have you the right in law or under the Constitution, as I respectfully submit, to take jurisdiction over offenses committed against them.

The whole basis of the Constitution was a restriction of power, and the whole basis of the federalist system was that there was not one sovereign centralized power from which all authority flows.

The Constitution was written by 55 educated and highly intelligent men in Philadelphia in 1787, but it was written so that it could be understood by people of limited education and modest intelligence.