Judicial Restraint or Activism Essay

Submitted By whatisthisstuff
Words: 637
Pages: 3
Open Document
Judicial Restraint or Judicial Activism The Supreme Court of the United States is a widely controversial topic because they decide what parts of our legislation follow the basic principles set in our constitution. Decisions made by the Supreme Court are often 5-4 votes, with one member generally being a swing vote. Members of the Supreme Court are not elected; they are appointed and serve until resignation or death. Each member of the Supreme Court has a different point of view but ultimately decides whether a law is constitutional or not. They can come to this conclusion by either their personal political views or direct analyzing of the constitution. Both sides are widely disputed and many Supreme Court members only follow one or the other. I believe that both are necessary in order for the Supreme Court to deem laws constitutional or unconstitutional. Judicial Activism is an approach where the Supreme Court judge uses his personal or political values or beliefs in order to reach a verdict. I believe this is needed because the constitution does not take into account many modern aspects of society. In order to deem a law constitutional, the judges must take into account how the world has changed since the constitution was written. While Judicial Activism expands beyond this and into personal, biased beliefs, I believe that all sides need to be represented and reflected in the constitutional laws. Judicial Restraint is the direct analyzing of laws and whether they are constitutional or not. This is necessary because it goes back to the basic principles involved in the creation of our government. If a law directly violates the constitution, the Supreme Court should immediately strike it down as such. The laws in this country may not entirely agree with the constitution, but they cannot go directly against it. The Supreme Court Justice I chose is Antonin Scalia, a judicial activist. He firmly believes in a modern, changing interpretation of the constitution in order to deem laws legal. He constantly challenges laws involving minority groups, a subject not mentioned much in the constitution. He also is reported to ask the most questions and piece together all information possible before he makes a decision. He interprets laws based on how he interprets the constitution, not how it was originally written. He is currently the longest standing Supreme Court Justice currently serving and has followed Judicial Activism throughout his days on the Supreme Court.

Decision Making in the
Show More

Related Documents: Judicial Restraint or Activism Essay

Difference Between Judicial Activism And Judicial Restraint

Judicial activism and judicial restraint are two different concepts of what role the judicial system has in the United States. Judicial Activism interprets the Constitution in favor of contemporary values and conditions. The federal judiciary takes an active role in monitoring the activities of Congress, state legislatures, and administrative agencies to ensure these governmental bodies do not overstep their bounds. Under the judicial activism approach, judges use their power to correct anything…

Words 287 - Pages 2

Judicial Restraint

Judicial Activism v. Judicial Restraint The Supreme Court often oversteps its bounds as protectors of individual rights: while its use of judicial activism can at times secure citizens’ civil liberties and rights and can also check the power of the other branches of government, the employment of personal or political motives in these decisions often lose the integrity of judicial review. In these cases, the Supreme Court justices are endowed with tremendous power and may use this power to further…

Words 1735 - Pages 7

The Pros And Cons Of Constitutional Interpretation

Constitutional interpretation, such as Originalism, Constitutional Fidelity, as well as Judicial Restraint and Judicial Activism. Secondly, this essay will analyze the role and…

Words 966 - Pages 4

Senate: Supreme Court of the United States and Judicial Restraint- Judicial Essay

some try to apply the Framers’ original intent, whilst some see the Constitution as a living document that changes over time. Judicial review- this is the precedent which allows Justices to declare laws as unconstitutional. This precedent was established by Marbury vs Madison 1803, allowing the power of the judicial branch to grow over time. Some examples of judicial review are Roe v. Wade, (1973), in which the Court overturned a Texas law prohibiting abortion; Brown v. Board of Education, (1954)…

Words 782 - Pages 4

Learning outcomes Essay examples

CHAPTER 9 Define Congress: The national legislative body of a country; designed to be the people’s most direct voice; it is a bicameral legislature (House and Senate) Explain four major differences between the House of Representatives and Senate: 1) The members of the house are elected from districts and the members of the senate are elected from states 2) There are 435 members of the house and 100 members of the senate 3) Members of the house serve a 2 yr term and senators serve a 6 yr term…

Words 774 - Pages 4

Essay on CITIZENS UNITED

Ellen Riehle POLS 110 Geroux April 16, 2014 Citizens United The Judicial Branch is a branch of the government that is separate and independent, but also has checks and balances to make sure other branches as well as their own are staying in line. Within this branch there is the Supreme Court consisting of nine members, one Chief Justice and eight associate justices, whose power is judgment. All judges are appointed for life and have original and appellate jurisdiction, but majority of the cases…

Words 1836 - Pages 8

What Is Earl Warren's Legacy

By departing from his old prosecutorial views and district attorney mindset, Warren was able to be more merciful in his Judicial Policymaking. During his term, Warren was cognizant of the existent correlation between crime and social conditions. Thus, he advocated for the creation of meaningful bottom-up policy in touch with societal needs rather than the top down policy of…

Words 1074 - Pages 5

Originalism Constitution

interpreting the Constitution often diverge, reflecting broader ideological differences regarding the role of the judiciary and the interpretation of constitutional principles. While Republicans generally embrace originalism as a means of promoting judicial restraint, limiting governmental power, and upholding constitutional principles, Democrats tend to be more cautious about its application, preferring a more flexible approach that considers both the original meaning of the Constitution and its contemporary…

Words 667 - Pages 3

Ap Government And Politics

moment of the civil rights movement, it demonstrates the necessity of the President’s willingness to enforce Supreme Court decisions. The need for the President’s support is not the only check the executive and legislative branches have on the judicial. The President is also responsible for nominating justices who must be confirmed by the Senate. Congress is able to impeach…

Words 900 - Pages 4

Political Factors Of The Supreme Court

The Supreme Court is currently the highest of the judicial courts in the country, with nine justices and judicial precedence over the existing courts in the nation. The Supreme Court Justices, court of appeals judges, and district court judges are nominated for their positions by the president, then judged and possibly appointed by the United States Senate. Being appointed by both the president and the United States Senate, there is possibility that certain factors may influence the decisions done…

Words 1512 - Pages 7