Sam Brownback: “that has been my view of what has been taking place recently. Individuals increasingly have said we cannot win this…”

“that has been my view of what has been taking place recently. Individuals increasingly have said we cannot win this legislative fight in the States or in the Congress, so we are going to take it to the courts. A judge who is a strict constructionist would ask, is this within our purview under the Constitution? And if it is not, the case would be thrown out, rather than the judge saying that the Constitution is an organic, living document, and I can look at this law imaginatively, how I want to, and then somehow find a way to reach the conclusion I want. To me, that is what the frustration of the public has been--that somehow they are now thrown out of the process. They can vote for or against the Senator from Alabama or the Senator from Kansas or the Senator from New Hampshire or the Senator from Massachusetts on the basis of a policy issue. But they don't have any right or ability to be able to contact a judge. Yet you have these massive issues that directly impact people regarding marriage and life. We have a bill up now where a Federal court has said that the Congress has appropriated this money and that is inappropriate and they must give these moneys out. Under the Constitution, the appropriation powers are clearly given to the Congress. The court is now stepping into that. My question to my colleague would be, Where does this stop if you don't start putting on judges who are judges rather than super legislators? Where does it stop?”