Preview

Difference Between Judicial Restraint Theory And Judicial Activism

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
339 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Difference Between Judicial Restraint Theory And Judicial Activism
The judicial restraint theory is based off the idea that judges should limit the exercise of their own power. For example, it would make judges think before shooting down laws, just because they can, with the exception being that they are unconstitutional. The opposite of judicial restraint is judicial activism. Judicial activism is when judges make rulings based on politics or personal beliefs rather than the law itself. The main difference between these two philosophies is judicial restraint is a bit more ethical then judicial activism. Both Clarence Thomas and Sonia Sotomayor are minorities to the Supreme Court. However, they both have very different viewpoints when it comes to how their race and background play a role in their rulings.
Continue Reading
View Writing Issues

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Summary Of The Movie 'Separate But Equal'
    • 767 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Summary Of The Movie 'Separate But Equal'

    Brennan states that one of the proposed majority decisions is changed into a dissent before the final ruling is announced, then the Justices will figure out the final form of the opinion. In “Separate but Equal”, a dissent never existed, the Supreme Court just skips it and goes right to writing the final form. This article shows how the Supreme Courts decisions can cause major issues and controversies among the country. “Separate but Equal” proved to be a great example of all the controversies and problems that can result from decisions made by the Supreme Court by dealing with the issue of Segregation in public…

    • 767 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Sonia Sotomayor: Supreme Court Justice
    • 266 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Sonia Sotomayor: Supreme Court Justice

    Sonia is the first Hispanic justice nominee, in 2009 she because the 111th court Justice, the third woman, and the only Hispanic to serve as US Supreme Court Justice. Sonia is the twelfth Roman Catholic justice and one of the youngest justices. Sotomayor has brought one of the diverse sets of life experiences to the courts due to her upbringing and past jobs. Sonia, being Roman Catholic, affects the way she approaches the law. She has been identified as a liberal because of…

    • 266 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    The Brethren Summary
    • 1203 Words
    • 5 Pages

    The Brethren Summary

    This shows through the cases each individual choses to hear, the way thereat their fellow justices, how they utilize their clerks, and how they vote. We start off with Burgers desperate search for a landmark case, he is obsessed with having a unanimous decision to show that the court, and he as a leader, remained strong. Almost in a continuation of the Warren courts desegregation rulings, Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education brought the landmark decision facing the topic of busing and integration versus desegregation. It was very difficult for the justices to come to a unanimous decision especially with Black acting as a unbudging liberal strict constructionist. Eventually, visually every justice conceded a part of their opinion and a unanimous decision was reached for pro-busing, a liberal decision. The press, however picked up on how split the court really was, stated that it seemed like “two sets of views, laid side by side”. A large part of their chapter is dedicated to deliberation on overturning or turning to a narrower interpretation of Miranda v. Arizona, the exclusionary rule, and Mapp v. Ohio. The fact that none of those attempts were successful was another win for a liberal court that Burger had not envisioned. In 1970 many people are upset with the war in Vietnam, and with their government. This leads to Cohen v California regarding free speech, Clay v U.S.…

    • 1203 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Comparing Justice Scalia And Justice Breyer
    • 398 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Comparing Justice Scalia And Justice Breyer

    Both Justice Scalia and Justice Breyer agree more than they differ and they agree about nothing so much as the extent to which they agree. Justice Scalia is a conservative and a calls himself an “originalist,” believing that judges should determine the framers’ original intent in the words of the constitution, and stick by what is says. Justice Breyer, on the other hand, is more of liberal, often called a pragmatist. Breyer believes in what he calls the living Constitution, the idea that the values outlined by the framers must be molded to apply to our ever-changing modern society.…

    • 398 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Mcdonalds Vs City Of Chicago Judicial Activism
    • 685 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Mcdonalds Vs City Of Chicago Judicial Activism

    Judicial Restraint and Judicial Activism in McDonald v. City of Chicago Judicial Restraint is when the Supreme Court restricts their powers to avoid making any changes to public policy, unless that policy is unconstitutional. When applying judicial restraint to cases, the courts stand by stare decisis (previous decisions of the court), uphold current law, and hold strictly to the text of the Constitution. They think that by only interpreting the constitution and not creating new laws, that they are preserving the laws that this country was founded on. Judicial activism is the opposite.…

    • 685 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Sotomayor's Argumentative Analysis
    • 154 Words
    • 1 Page

    Sotomayor's Argumentative Analysis

    Magtadt defines liberals has typically holding civil rights close to heart. They are often the primary defenders of individuals or groups that they see as victims of past discrimination, such as racial minorities, women and the poor (p. 37, 2015). Although identifying as independent she has quite often voted along with the liberal side of the Supreme Court. However, it can be said that unlike other liberals Sotomayor takes a more case-by-case approach. Sotomayor has shown a willingness to side with conservative in cases pertaining to criminal law, no doubt an influence of her time as prosecutor. For example, in Wetzel v. Lambert back in February 2010, she sided with the conservative bloc’s majority opinion to reinstituting a convict’s death…

    • 154 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    How Did Jeffersonians Achieve Their Goals
    • 472 Words
    • 2 Pages

    How Did Jeffersonians Achieve Their Goals

    Madison. Marshall greatly magnified the authority of the court, and slapped the Jeffersonians. Controversy had clouded the question of who had the final authority to determine the meaning of the Constitution. Jefferson in the Kentucky resolutions (1798) had tried to allot that right to the individual states. But now Jefferson in Jefferson cousin on the Court had cleverly promoted the contrary principle of ¨judicial review.¨ Marshall inserted the keystone into the arch that supports the tremendous power of the Supreme Court in American…

    • 472 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Difference Between Judicial Supremacy And Parliamentary Supremacy
    • 124 Words
    • 1 Page

    Difference Between Judicial Supremacy And Parliamentary Supremacy

    Although the entrenchment of the Charter impacted the judiciary to become more powerful, but also through the concept of judicial supremacy as opposed to parliamentary supremacy. First of all, “ the concept of judicial supremacy does not focus on the specific act of review itself. Judicial supremacy refers to the “obligation of coordinate officials not only to obey that [judicial] ruling but to follow its reasoning in future deliberations” (qtd. Whittington. par: 12). Essentially, judicial supremacy allows judges to make any “ constitutional authority and stems directly from the 1982 Constitution Act”(Clio’s Current, par: 1). Whereas parliamentary supremacy refers to the legislative body being the supreme leaders, and law-makers in relationship…

    • 124 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Thurgood Marshall Research Paper
    • 1454 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Thurgood Marshall Research Paper

    Johnson Kennedy’s successor appointed Marshall to serve as the first black U.S. solicitor general, with two years of being solicitor he won 14 out of the 19 cases he had. In 1967 President Johnson nominated Thurgood to serve on the bench by October he was moved up to be a Supreme Court justice, him becoming the first African American to serve on the nation's highest court. He later joined liberal Supreme Court by Chief Justice Earl Warren, who aligned with Thurgood’s viewing on politics and and Constitution. He consistently supported rulings keeping a strong protection on individual rights and the liberal interpretations of controversial social issues. Part of the majority that ruled in favor of the right to abortion in the 1973 case Roe V. Wade, 1972 case Furman V. Georgia that led to De Facto Moratorium on death penalty, Marshall gave his opinion on it by saying that it was unconstitutional in circumstances. Throughout his 24 years on the court republican presidents appointed eight consecutive justices, he gradually became an isolated liberal member of an increasingly conservative court. For the part time on the bench he largely relegated to issuing strongly worded dissents as the court had reinstated the death penalty, limited affirmative, and abortion…

    • 1454 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Clarence Thomas Supreme Court Cases
    • 651 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Clarence Thomas Supreme Court Cases

    Clarence Thomas is the second colored male justice to serve on the U.S Supreme Court. I wanted to write about Clarence Thomas because i was fascinated how he overcame racial barriers, why he rarely asked questions in court, also his opinion as a U.S Supreme Court justice.…

    • 651 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Difference Between Absolutism And Constitutionalism
    • 717 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Difference Between Absolutism And Constitutionalism

    The idea of a single person holding dominion over all others to form an independent state is the driving force in state consolidation in 17th century Europe. Political development in this concept led to different methods of operating a government two prominent models being absolutism and constitutionalism. The first one centers on a strong centralized monarchy and the dominating royal power and the latter is based on a limited monarchy where the ruler is confined to the law and parliament. Theoretically, England planned to follow the constitutional model but the Stuart monarchs thought otherwise of this and conflicted with the Parliament throughout the century. This conflict centers on the evolution of England to becoming a world power.…

    • 717 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Term Limit In Supreme Court Justices
    • 1001 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Term Limit In Supreme Court Justices

    One of the major jobs for the federal judges is to protect the United States from the “tyranny of the majority”. Furthermore, even if the majority rules, the minority still has rights. Many components of the Bill of Rights, which the judges are called to enforce, are designed to protect the rights of the unpopular minorities. Being a Supreme Court judge is a difficult job, and even with life tenure, they are not completely immune from political pressure. They remain members of society; therefore it is difficult to allow things to happen even if they know it is morally wrong, but constitutionally…

    • 1001 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Philosophy Of Judicial Restraint
    • 249 Words
    • 1 Page

    Philosophy Of Judicial Restraint

    I believe that the judicial restraint philosophy is more appropriate for federal judges to follow because, unlike judicial activism, it does not allow judges to expand vague Constitutional principles to fit their own viewpoint and principles. Judicial restraint does not authorize judges to interpret Constitutional texts and laws (conservative or liberal interpretation) in order to serve their own principles, policies, and considered estimates of the vital needs of contemporary society. The judicial restraint policy also ensures that separation of powers is applied justly so that different branches of government do not intervene with the power of the other branch. Also, because the Stare Decisis has a huge impact on future decisions and precedent,…

    • 249 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Essay On Life Tenure
    • 510 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Essay On Life Tenure

    During their tenure, a Justice will be able to continue learning and understanding the law, so that in every situation they know what is constitutional and unconstitutional. Confucius once said, “Study the past if you would define the future.” The decisions of Supreme Court Justices have led to many new laws. However, those decisions are made by justices who have been doing that for a while. These Supreme Court Justices understand our past, the decisions, laws, and consequences, and know how to act upon that because of their prolonged tenure as justices. Under no circumstance does anybody just stop learning, so Justices will be ripe with knowledge until their time is done, they choose to step down, or are impeached. Therefore, Supreme Court Justices life tenure helps them understand and master their role in the Supreme…

    • 510 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Difference Between Civil Rights And Civil Liberties
    • 1103 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Difference Between Civil Rights And Civil Liberties

    It’s important to know the difference between your civil liberties and your civil rights. Knowledge is power and knowing your rights is important for the protection of your own rights and respect for the rights of others around you; if you don’t stand up for yourself and know your own right then who will? But first to understand what the difference between these two essential parts of our overall freedom and everyday lives, we must distinguish and understand what they are individually.…

    • 1103 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More

Related Topics