On the recordJuly 13, 2004
The answer to that is clearly yes. In fact, the Senator is a much better lawyer than I ever was, and I say that to the Senator from Alabama as someone who was a prosecutor and a very accomplished lawyer. I made it up to a fourth year associate, so I just started on my legal career and opted to do something different, and that was run for Congress. I recall when Madison wrote this Constitution about checks and balances, I am not sure he envisioned the role of the judiciary as we see it today. Marbury v. Madison sort of evolved as to what the role of the courts was in interpreting the Constitution, but clearly he gave the authority to change the Constitution not to the courts. He gave the authority to change and create rights within the Constitution to the Congress and to the States, as a check on the Congress, to make sure the States would go along with what we wanted to do. So to change this important document, this template for the Government that we have, he wanted to create a very high bar, wanted to make sure there was broad public consensus before we did something to affect this very important document. Now this is being used as an excuse not to change it, when judges do it every day. Every day a judge will attempt to expand, usually expand in some form or another, the meaning by adapting it to contemporary standards or contemporary jurisprudence. I don't know what that means, but it basically means I am the judge, I am the law, and I can do what I want.
Source
govinfo.gov




