Earlier quoted context omitted.
I always found the faith in the revered interpretations of some constitutional document written centuries ago, and the respect for the "Founding Fathers" not as historical figures, but as some kind of guiding lights for today, totally bizarro. Even the name "Founding Fathers" and the way it's thrown around seems quite bizarre for a democracy. It's the people, and the will of the people, that should be respected, not…
The will of the people on 2001-09-12 would be to get rid of jury trials and allow arbitrary searches and seizures. People are emotional and dumb, and sometimes it is helpful to build an intentional slowness into the process. If it's truly the will of the people, you should have no problem getting 2/3 of Congress to agree on it, followed by 3/4 of state legislatures.
"those who may be unfamiliar: look into the passing of the USA P.A.T.R.I.O.T Act passed shortly after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, a bill of over 2000 pages which was rushed through congress in span of a few days from finalization to ratification under the prosumtion of necessity to provide the tools to combat terrorism. It stripped away many powers of the judicial branch to provide oversight, and provisions intended to be 'temporary' have been continually extended by presidents (executive branch) on both sides of the aisle since."