Exam 12: The Federal Courts: Activism Versus Restraint
Should the federal courts follow a doctrine of judicial restraint or judicial activism?
The question of whether federal courts should follow a doctrine of judicial restraint or judicial activism is a complex and contentious issue.
Judicial restraint advocates argue that federal courts should exercise caution and deference to the other branches of government, particularly when it comes to interpreting and applying the law. They believe that judges should not be overly involved in shaping public policy and should instead focus on interpreting the law as it is written. This approach is seen as promoting stability, predictability, and respect for the separation of powers.
On the other hand, proponents of judicial activism argue that federal courts have a duty to actively protect individual rights and liberties, even if it means challenging or overturning laws passed by the legislative or executive branches. They believe that judges should take a more proactive role in addressing social and political issues, particularly when it comes to protecting marginalized or vulnerable groups. This approach is seen as promoting progress, equality, and justice.
Ultimately, the question of whether federal courts should follow a doctrine of judicial restraint or judicial activism is a matter of ongoing debate and interpretation. Different judges and legal scholars may have differing views on the appropriate role of the judiciary in our system of government. It is important for federal courts to carefully consider the specific facts and circumstances of each case and to strive for a balanced and principled approach to interpreting and applying the law.
Besides the civil code, what is another tradition that underlies the American legal framework?
A
To what extent is the Supreme Court sensitive to the public's perception of its image as a partisan political body?
C
What does it mean that the Supreme Court is the court of last resort?
How did the Taney Court's judicial philosophy differ from that of the Marshall Court?
How, if at all, has the Roberts differed from the Rehnquist Court?
The lowest level of courts in the federal judicial system are the ___.
With what doctrine was the Taney Court associated, and which landmark decision was its most famous?
Is judicial activism necessary because some issues are just too difficult for the political branches of the government to confront?
After 1988, when the Supreme Court gained nearly complete discretion over the cases it chooses to hear and resolve, what has happened to the number of cases resolved by the Court per year?
During his tenure as an associate justice on the Supreme Court, Anthony Kennedy often served as a "swing vote" by voting ___.
Which judicial decision allowed for state restrictions on abortion but did not actually overturn Roe v. Wade (1973)?
In 2013, the _______Senate pushed through a change in Senate rules to allow ___.
In what sense did the new States formed after independence depart from their inherited common law tradition?
How have the climate and tone surrounding the process of nomination and confirmation to judicial posts changed since the mid-1950s?
A study of the demographic characteristics of federal judicial appointments of recent presidents reveals that ___.
Filters
- Essay(0)
- Multiple Choice(0)
- Short Answer(0)
- True False(0)
- Matching(0)