Should the Federalist Papers be used in court decisions?

I thought this might provoke interesting debate. I have recently discussed with a friend of mine as to whether it is appropriate or not to use the Federalist Papers in court decisions regarding the Constitution. After all, the Constitution was ratified by the States and carefully penned in a convention whereas the Federalist Papers were not. Could it not be then that the Federalist Papers do not represent the views of the Constitutional Convention, but instead an interpretation of what transpired?

 

I have no problem with the Federalist Papers as part of a constitutional court case to the extent they are used to prove the original intent of the constitutional provisions and not as a legal principle.

Take care,

 

Okay, but when proving the "origional intent" of the Constitution, they are still just the interpritations of 3 men and may not reflect the opinions of the collective.