LEARN MORE...

Judicial Activism

Content type

User Generated

Subject

History

Type

Homework

Uploaded By

Znqvanovyn099

Pages

Showing Page:

1/4

Surname 1

Students name

Course name

Course code

Institution of affiliation

Date of submission

Showing Page:

2/4

Surname 2

Judicial activism

Definition

Coutinho et al (2015), defines judicial activism as the concept of delivering a court ruling by

personal ideas or opinions with disregard to the existing laws. The concept has a close

correlation to power separation, statutory construction, and constitutional interpretation.

Reasons for critic of activist judges

Critics argue that “judicial activism,” is simply a way of avoiding the passing of the right

and legal decision(Dickson,2010). The judge has no legal evidence for the ruling passed.

Therefore, the decision does not take into consideration the good of the people. Although most of

the cases in question lack a clear constitutional answer, sometimes the judges avoid the rule of

law to avoid confrontations. There are cases when the ruling is purely for the good of the

involved parties, but it does not give the judge a right to disobey the constitution. An example is

the Roe V. Wade ruling. In the case, the Supreme Court overlooked the Texas law that stated

abortion was a crime. However, the supreme court acknowledges the right to abortion as a

privacy right. In the case, it looks like the judges were giving a personal opinion of the issue at

hand instead of sticking to the interpretation of the law. The inclusion of a medical opinion was

not part of the Texas law, and therefore the judges overstretched the meaning of the policy in the

ruling.

A lot of judicial activism is seen in the child custody cases (Coutinho et al.,2015). There

are situations where the judge makes the ruling for the good of the child and ignores the actual

law. For example, the mother has full custody until the child is above eighteen years of age but

some judges give the fathers more time with the child as long as it is of benefit.

Showing Page:

3/4

End of Preview - Want to read all 4 pages?

Access Now

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Surname 1 Students name Course name Course code Institution of affiliation Date of submission Surname 2 Judicial activism Definition Coutinho et al (2015), defines judicial activism as the concept of delivering a court ruling by personal ideas or opinions with disregard to the existing laws. The concept has a close correlation to power separation, statutory construction, and constitutional interpretation. Reasons for critic of activist judges Critics argue that “judicial activism,” is simply a way of avoiding the passing of the right and legal decision(Dickson,2010). The judge has no legal evidence for the ruling passed. Therefore, the decision does not take into consideration the good of the people. Although most of the cases in question lack a clear constitutional answer, sometimes the judges avoid the rule of law to avoid confrontations. There are cases when the ruling is purely for the good of the involved parties, but it does not give the judge a right to disobey the constitution. An example is the Roe V. Wade ruling. In the case, the Supreme Court overlooked the Texas law that stated abortion was a crime. However, the supreme court acknowledges the right to abortion as ...
Purchase document to see full attachment

Tags: government judges judicial activists