0
Do you think an advocate of judicial restraint would support a narrow interpretation of the constitution or a broad interpretation?
Wiki User
∙ 14y ago
An advocate of judicial restrain would support a narrow interpretation of the Constitution, one that adhered closely to the language of the document and his or her belief about the Framers' original intent. Interpretive ideologies such as textualism, "strict constructionism," and originalism are most often associated with judicial restraint. Contextualism, which attempts to infer intent from content, may also result in judicial restraint; however, the degree of subjectivity implicit in this method can also lend itself to judicial activism.
Wiki User
∙ 14y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
An advocate of judicial restraint would support a narrow interpretation or a broad interpretation?
it would be narrow because they only veto un constitutional laws
How does judicial activism and judicial restraint affect the separation of powers?
Judicial activism weakens the separation of powers by involving the Court in what are traditionally executive and legislative functions. Judicial restraint reinforces separation of powers.
How can the US Constitution be changed?
It can be changed by the three ideas of Flexibility: The Elastic Clause, The Amendment Process, and Judicial Interpretation.
What is flexible interpretation?
flexible interpretation, also known as judicial activism, is a way of viewing the constitution that shows judges as trusted individuals who sometimes inject their personal beliefs and opinions when making judicial decisions rather than interpreting the constitution by its original intent. many left leaning justices of the supreme court employ the use of flexible interpretation because of its allowance of personal thoughts and beliefs having an effect on judicial rulings.
Who is is an example of a justice who advocated judicial restraint?
felix frankfurter
An advocate of judicial restraint would support a narrow interpretation or a broad interpretation?
it would be narrow because they only veto un constitutional laws
How would the US Supreme Court decide a case using judicial restraint?
Judicial restraint follows earlier precedents, tends to uphold existing or new laws, and uses an originalist or constructionalist interpretation of the Constitution (these are literal frameworks).
What is the name of the judge who interpret the constitution narrowly?
judicial restraint.
Does judicial restraint rely on the principle of stare decisis?
Doctrinalism relies on the principle of stare decisis.Judicial restraint relies on a narrow interpretation of the text of the Constitution and the Framers' inferred intent in decision-making. If the precedent being relied upon under stare decisis was made using judicial restraint, then adhering to the precedent also involves judicial restraint; if the controlling precedent being used represents an instance of judicial activism, then upholding the precedent also requires a (lesser) degree of judicial activism.The concepts of judicial restraint and judicial activism relate to decisions based on a particular theoretical view of the Constitution and its purpose. Stare decisis relates to consistency in upholding case law, regardless of whether the precedent was originally determined via activism or restraint.
What is judicial restraint?
Judicial restraint is the philosophy that judges and justices should defer to written legislation whenever possible, if it is not in conflict with the Constitution. A justice who uses judicial restraint tends to take a narrower view of the Constitution and does not attempt to broaden the definition of Amendments to fit a particular social or political agenda. The opposite of judicial restraint is judicial activism. For more information on the debate between judicial activism and judicial restrain, see Related Links, below.
What Judicial philosophy states that the court should uphold acts of the Congress unless acts violate specific provisions of the Constitution?
Judicial restraint. The opposite of judicial restraint is judicial activism.For more information about the controversy over judicial activism and judicial restraint, see Related Questions, below.
What is it called when judges make decisions that closely follow earlier court cases in the words of the Constitution?
Following precedent or stare decisis.
Strict construction of the Constitution?
Legal philosophy of judicial interpretation.
What refers to when the supreme court interprets and applies the constitution as it stands written and as it was understood by its framers?
judicial restraint
What is a example of judicial restraint?
One example of judicial restraint is Gibbons vs. Ogden. In this case, the Supreme Court held that the power to regulate interstate commerce was granted to Congress by the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. This is seen to be an example of judicial restraint because it restrained its power within congress to regulate interstate commerce and they were not exercising their power outside of any law or ruling. They found no violation in the Constitution from this case.
What is it called when judges make desicions that closely follow earlier court cases and the words of the constitution?
Judicial restraint....
What is it called when judges make decisions that closley follow earlier court cases and the words of the constitution?
Judicial restraint
