EssaysForStudent.com - Free Essays, Term Papers & Book Notes
Search

Judicial Activism Vs. Judicial Self-Restraint

By:   •  Essay  •  279 Words  •  April 8, 2010  •  1,014 Views

Page 1 of 2

Judicial Activism Vs. Judicial Self-Restraint

Judicial Activism vs. Judicial Self-Restraint

There are many differences between Judicial Activism and Judicial Self Restraint. Judicial Activism is the process by which judges take an active role in the governing process and Judicial Self Restraint is that Judges should not read their own philosophies into the constitution.

Judicial activism is the view that the Supreme Court should be an active and creative partner with the legislative and executive branches in help shaping the government policy (Wasserman American Politics 138). The believers of this philosophical view of how our judicial branch suggests that the Supreme Court is more active and participates in molding the policies of American society. It can be argued that during the end of the Civil War and the "Separate but Equal" era, in cases such as the Brown v. Board of Education, Baker v. Carr, Missouri ex. Rel. Gaines v. Canada, and Sweatt v. Painter. The more recent, Bush v. Gore case is a good example of judicial activism.

Judicial

Continue for 1 more page »  •  Join now to read essay Judicial Activism Vs. Judicial Self-Restraint
Download as (for upgraded members)
txt
pdf