Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
Understanding the Judiciary: Activism, Restraint, and Power
The judiciary is one of the three main parts of our government, and its role is to interpret and apply the law. However, people do not always agree on how it should do this. Some people think that courts have become too powerful and that judges are making laws from the bench, a concept known as judicial activism (Roosevelt, 2008). Others believe that courts should show judicial restraint, which means they should only interpret the law, not make it (Epstein & Walker, 2019).
One of the primary roles of the judiciary is the interpretation and application of the law. This includes deciphering the meaning of statutes, regulations, and constitutional provisions. In doing so, the judiciary ensures that the law is applied consistently and fairly across all cases and circumstances. Another critical role of the judiciary is the protection of individual rights and liberties. Courts often serve as the last resort for individuals seeking to protect their rights under the law. These rights can be those enshrined in the constitution or established by legislation. In this capacity, the judiciary serves as a guardian of civil liberties and a bulwark against potential governmental overreach. The judiciary also reviews the actions of the executive branch to ensure they are legal and constitutional. This includes reviewing regulations, executive orders, and other administrative actions. In this way, the judiciary helps to maintain the balance of power among the branches of government and ensures that the executive branch operates within the bounds of the law. In addition to these roles, the judiciary is responsible for the resolution of disputes. These disputes can be between individuals, corporations, or government entities and can encompass both civil disputes, such as contract disagreements or personal injury cases, and criminal cases. Through this function, the judiciary contributes to the maintenance of social order and the peaceful resolution of conflicts. The judiciary also serves as a check on the powers of the other branches of government. Through the process of judicial review, courts have the power to declare laws unconstitutional and can check potential abuses of power by the executive branch. This role is fundamental to the system of checks and balances that characterizes democratic governance. Finally, the judiciary plays a key role in upholding the rule of law, ensuring that all individuals and government entities are subject to the law. This role is fundamental to the preservation of justice and equality in society.
So, what is judicial activism? It is when court...…respond to this by saying they are just going back to older precedents that liberals ignored (Tushnet, 1999). This shows that interpreting the Constitution and the law can be subjective, and different judges can have different opinions based on their understanding and beliefs. It is a very subjective process, or at least it can be, depending on how one approaches the matter.
So, the term "activism" is not defined according to a fixed or objective standard. It is often used to criticize decisions that someone disagrees with. It is also a term that shows the tension in the judiciary's role: to interpret the law, but also to protect individual rights and check the power of the other branches of government. Not everyone, obviously, is going to agree with how the court rules.
In conclusion, the judiciary's job is a balancing act. It has to interpret and apply the law, protect individual rights, and keep the other branches of government in check. Judicial activism and restraint are not inherently good or bad, but tools that judges can use to do their job. The important thing is to find a balance, making sure that the judiciary does not overstep its role, but also that it can effectively do its job as a check…
References
Roosevelt, K. (2008). The myth of judicial activism: making sense of Supreme Court decisions.
Yale University Press.
Epstein, L., & Walker, T. G. (2019). Constitutional Law for a Changing America: Rights,Liberties, and Justice. CQ Press.
Friedman, B. (2009). The Will of the People: How Public Opinion Has Influenced the SupremeCourt and Shaped the Meaning of the Constitution. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Rosenberg, G. N. (2008). The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring About Social Change? Universityof Chicago Press.
Tushnet, M. (1999). Taking the Constitution Away from the Courts. Princeton University Press.
Federal Government Expansion Throughout American history the size and power of the federal government has been continually debated. This is because there are concerns that if it becomes too big it could have an impact on the scope of authority reserved for the states and stifle civil liberties. However, despite these worries the federal government has continued to expand its power. To fully understand what is happening requires focusing on four
This means that Congressional officials and the White House are reluctant to make the necessary adjustments (in order to address these issues). Instead, they have been utilizing various gimmicks to demonstrate how they are dealing with the problem. During the course of their reelection campaign, they can show how they helped to tackle the federal government's fiscal challenges and increased the number of projects / funding for various programs.
Federal Government Tax The main source of government income is taxes. The government taxes various organizations in the economy differently to ensure that adequate revenue is collected. Corporate use loopholes in the tax system to reduce the tax paid to the federal government. The government should eliminate these loopholes to improve tax collection. Some taxes such as gift and estate tax as they are counter productive. Changes made to the federal
The problems facing Medicare recipients and the federal government almost seem to be overwhelming. There are proponents of a plan to privatize Social Security and health insurance, placing the onus on the individual to pay for his own health care through savings specifically for this. Some others would have the program go through the private HMOs who have, in the past, contained the costs of care by having primary
The Office exacts a new level of accountability, which encourages a broader range of competitions and new organizations to enter these competitions. Congress authorizes the Office to develop the franchise funds pilots and to expand the competitive environment. It also invites the private sector to participate in new markets and at new levels of commercial workload. At the same time, it encourages the public to compete for the same
Federal Government Policy: Mandatory Internet Filtering As a key component of the cyber-safety plan of the Australian Government, ISP filtering seeks to address a number of issues revolving around online concerns encountered by individuals as well as households in relation to restricted content material. The Current Federal Government Policy on Internet Filtering: Arguments For and Against The Australian Communications and Media Authority is charged with the responsibility of facilitating the regulation of internet