Judicial activism can be defined as judicial rulings assumed of being formulated on the political or individual contemplations relatively or not the current set up law.Currently in my state, there are many Judicial activism’s. Their jobs and intentions varies from one to another depending on what they intend to do.
In the supreme court in the united states of America, the spirit of judicial activism was seen as a state where the judge’s decision in a case is based on the personal social life or political beliefs and not the interpretation of the law that is in existence at that time. However, the judges do change the law on the current situation. This is because they may say a given activity or behavior is legal or not legal in accordance with the written law, possibly will say that action ought to be illegal or ought to be legal. Thereafter, the such decision becomes a law.
Judicial activism, may come up by the mass movements of the people in a state. Some may be fighting for the change of the constitution to accept one or more things that they think is good for them. For instance, people may protest because they want marijuana to be legalized. Hence, after the consideration of the event the judges may accept it up some conditions to maintain the political stability in the country.
On the other hand, the members of the trade unions may lead their groups so that they protest due to some of the actives being done by the government. The judicial activist may step in to pass some of the laws so that to cover up the government.
The increase of some social groups in the republic like the marriage of people of the same sex may force the state to accept their rights, though in the real sense such activities are wrong but because of political reasons the judicial activists do endorse them to become law.
Content will be erased after question is completed.