Overview
Judicial activism and restraint are two contrasting philosophies that guide how judges interpret laws and make decisions. Judicial activism encourages judges to take an active role in shaping laws, often leading to significant social changes, while judicial restraint emphasizes a more conservative a...
Key Terms
Example: Judicial activism was evident in the ruling of Roe v. Wade.
Example: Judicial restraint was shown in cases where courts upheld legislative decisions.
Example: Different judges may interpret the Constitution differently based on their judicial philosophy.
Example: The Supreme Court's decisions can set precedents for lower courts.
Example: The principle of stare decisis relies on precedent.
Example: Stare decisis ensures consistency in the law.