I think the question has laid out the key factors at play, which are really that the Court Challenges Program facilitated access to the courts, and continues to, for groups and voices that are not properly or adequately represented otherwise and whose perspectives wouldn't reach there otherwise.
With respect, I think it is actually critical that there is federal support in establishing functioning checks and balances within a robust constitutional democracy, for the bringing of challenges to test the constitutionality of legislation and to have that done before the appropriate body in our system, which is the judiciary.
We have to understand that of course the federal government provides extensive funding in defence of legislation. It funds the court system. What we're talking about with the Court Challenges Program is a very, very modest amount of money that facilitates an opening of the door to groups that might otherwise not be able to be there.
The period of time that you're speaking to was when the courts were grappling with, for instance, what it meant to recognize sexual and gender diversity. What did it mean to recognize the rights of women? What did it mean to recognize groups of people who hadn't been at the table historically? It was critical in our understanding as a country and in the development of constitutional law that recognizes all of us.