“We must protect the freedoms of even those who hate us, and that we may find objectionable. If we fail in this task, we become victims of the precedents we create.”

Sort of a legal spin on a Matthew 5:44. We must protect even those that hate freedom (Antifa, too many government officials, etc.)

Is it the right of those who would deprive us of Life and Liberty to do so?

What shall we be required to sacrifice to the end of our protecting their "rights"?
Clearly, concerning the matter, reason must prevail, a right balance must be struck.
Objectively, it is only in the enlightening presence of Virtue that reason can prevail, that a right balance can be struck.
Lamentably, these ideals are, almost certainly, unattainable ones in this day of the free fall involution of Virtue and of values.

As Justice Robert Jackson expressed it:

" The Bill of Rights is not a suicide pact."

How come universities now have embraced the polar opposite of this quote? Why has the party of tolerance become so intolerant? Why have the defenders of compassion and respect for diversity of race have no compassion or respect for diversity of ideas? Why are the advocates of free speech rioting during speeches? How hateful shall their protests against hate speech be? There is only so much appeasement and compromise that can be offered until the rule of law is simply ignored and the mob rules. The worst of it is that the mob is easily manipulated by wealthy globalists bent on the American republic's submission. Either live by principle or power -- one must sacrifice one for the other.

Nice going E Archer.

"JUSTICE" must be identified, beginning with - my/your rights end at your/my nose. Antifa can proclaim communism and anti-freedom all they like. Brandishing arms to create fear and blocking right-of-way is a serious criminal act (not a right) that needs be prosecuted to the fullest. Fiscal harm is but one element of nose infraction. Within the de jure States united, servants were to be hired to protect / enhance individual sovereign "rights". When that body politic of servants ventures into religion's domain (feeding the poor, clothing the naked, housing the homeless, financing the indigent, defining sacraments - by example marriage, authorizing human sacrifice, as gods - claim ability to create totalitarian canons calling them laws, elimination of private perfected allodium, favoring one grouping of individuals (sovereigns, communists, etc.) over another, etc., etc., etc.), all with a socialistic national establishment of religion, "rights" are done away.