I did not watch tonight's debate, but I have seen it reported in more than one source, e.g., here, that Hillary Clinton, when asked if she supported a Supreme Court that would adopt a strict reading of the Constitution, responded with no mention of that document, and said instead:
I feel strongly that the Supreme Court needs to stand on the side of the American people, not the powerful corporations and the wealthy.
I will put to one side Ms. Clinton's remarks (at $250,000 a pop) to the powerful corporation known as Goldman Sachs, and her income last year, reportedly a bit over ten million dollars. The main takeaway from her comment is her breathtaking misunderstanding of both the Court and the Constitution.
As liberals used to know, an independent Court was created by the Constitution precisely to be anti-majoritarian, that is, to be a neutral, not a "side-taking," arbiter of the law. Giving effect to popular will is the job of the political branches, not the Supreme Court (or inferior courts).
Someone might also inform Ms. Clinton that corporate managers and the rich are also -- ready now? -- part of the American people, and deserve no more justice, and no less, than anyone else.
I don't believe the honesty of her claim of siding with
the "American people" instead of "powerful corporations and the wealthy".
Hillary Hillary Clinton Is Outraising Trump 20-to-1 Among Billionaires
~ bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-09-26/billionaire-donors-led-by-soros-simons-favor-clinton-over-trump
Phony as a $3 bill.
So she intends to appoint communists and wealth redistributionists
rather than Constitutional jurists?
No, just donors.
Clinton gave State Department appointments to 194 donors
"These donors represented nearly 40% of the 511 advisory appointments
the State Department made during Clinton's tenure".
~ washingtonexaminer.com/clinton-gave-state-department-appointments-to-194-donors/article/2602272
Sadly, most liberals and all progressives believe that judges and justices should champion causes and advocate on behalf of politically identified classes of victims. A charitable observer would assess this as a galactic misunderstanding of the constitutional role of the judiciary. A more realistic assessment is that Hillary, Soros and Obama et al. recognize that to control America all three branches of government must operate as policy enforcers for the ruling class. The will of the people is something to be managed by their betters.