The [Constitution] contains an enumeration of powers expressly granted by the people to their [federal] government. It has been said [by Jefferson and others, now for centuries] that these powers ought to be construed strictly; but why ought they to be so construed? Is there one sentence in the Constitution which ives countenance to this rule? ...nor is there one sentence in the Constitution ... that prescribes this rule. We do not therefore think ourselves justified in adopting it. What do gentlemen mean by a strict construction? If they contend only against that enlarged construction which would extend words beyond their natural and obvious import [against which "they" don't contend], we...should not controvert the principle. If they contend for that narrow construction which, in support of some theory not to be found in the Constitution, would deny to the government those powers which the word of the grant, as usually understood, impart, and which are consistent with the general views and objects [in the Preamble] of the [Constitution]; for that narrow construction which would cripple the government, and render it unequal to the objects for which it is declared to be instituted ["...to forma a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty...."] and to which the powers given, as fairly understood, render it competent; then we cannot perceive the propriety of this strict construction, nor adopt it as a rule by which the Constitution is to be expounded.

--Chief Justice John Marshall