Judicial activism or Judicial Restraint Judges Engagement Discussion
With Chapter 14 the Judicial Branch will receive our focus. Article #3 of the United States Constitution outlines details about the Judicial branch of government and the supreme court. The Framers expected that the courts would be the “least dangerous” branch of government, but the court-centered pathway can be a dramatic avenue for public policy change.
ACTION: Respond to the questions below
Judicial Restraint vs. Judicial Activism
Judicial restraint- idea behind judicial self-restraint is that judges should not read their own philosophies into the Constitution and should avoid direct confrontations with Congress, the president, and the states whenever possible
Judicial Activism- The idea behind judicial activism is that the Constitution is a living document whose strength lies in its flexibility, and judges should shape constitutional meaning to fit the needs of contemporary society
Should Judges be engaged in Judicial activism or Judicial Restraint? In your post included two cases (and relevant details) mentioned in the chapter as falling in the category of restraint or activism.
What do presidents look for in selecting a Supreme Court Justice? What factors about the position of a Supreme Court Justice make the decision so important?