0
Still curious? Ask our experts.
Chat with our AI personalities
Judy
Beau
JordanAdd your answer:
Earn +20 pts
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.
The idea that judges should use their power broadly to further justice based ontheir own personal views or agenda is called?
judicial activism!
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.
Did the Warren Court believe in judicial activism or judicial restraint?
The Warren Court, which was active from 1953 until Chief Justice Earl Warren retired in 1969, is often accused of judicial activism for its many decisions supporting African-Americans' civil rights. Whether they believed they were judicial activists or not is unknown.
What court became identified with judicial activism?
The Warren Court, which was active from 1953 until Chief Justice Earl Warren retired in 1969, is often accused of judicial activism for its many decisions supporting African-Americans' civil rights.Judicial activism is often a derogatory charge associated with the phrase "legislating from the bench," that implies the Court exceeds its authority toUNDER CONSTRUCTION
