[Sabertooth]

He's a strict constructionist.

Is Gonzales' constructionism strict enough that he believes the Constitution trumps stare decisis?

I don't know the answer in his case, but that's the real test of a strict constructionist. Any judge willing to shrug his shoulders at the "settled law" of the "living document" bench legislators isn't all that faithful to original intent, nor to the separation of powers.

[Dog Gone]

Is Gonzales' constructionism strict enough that he believes the Constitution trumps stare decisis?

There's no way to know, since the Texas Supreme Court doesn't generally rule on questions regarding the US Constitution. But jurists give heavy weight to settled law, which they must. Every case can't be a case of first impression, and I don't think Marbury v. Madison is likely to be overturned, despite its judicial activist ruling.