0
Judicial restraint is important because without it courts will be tempted to rewrite laws through interpretation rather than simply to confirm or reject the constitutionality of a law. When a court rejects the constitutionality of a law, it should not attempt to fix the problem, rather it should remand the matter back to Congress for revision. Unfortunately for justice, courts often fail to enact constitutionally mandated restraint.
Still curious? Ask our experts.
Chat with our AI personalities
Rene
Judy
Coach
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Compare Judicial Restraint and Judicial Activism?
Judicial restraint is the theory that judges should limit their exercise of power and strike down laws only when they are obviously unconstitutional, and always follow precedents set by older courts. Judicial activism is the opposite view, and is sometimes meant to imply politically motivated judicial decisions.
According to the doctrine of judicial restraint the judiciary should?
the doctrine of judicial restrain holds that judges should generally defer to precedent and to decisions made by legislature
The idea that judges should use their power broadly to further justice based ontheir own personal views or agenda is called?
judicial activism!
Supreme Court justices who support judicial activism and those who support judicial restraint most disagree on the answer to which question?
How important is the original intent of the Constitution when deciding cases? -Apex
What should the judicial powers be invested in?
The Judicial Branch
