Judicial activism and Judicial restraint
What is the difference between judicial activism and judicial restraint and which is better? In order to answer that we have to know what they are.
Let’s start with judicial activism. The word judicial is derived from the latin word iudicals meaning “of or belonging to a court of justice”. The word activism means “the policy or action of using vigorous campaigning to bring about political or social change”. Judicial activism is “the use of the power of judicial review to set aside government acts. Generally, the phrase is used to identify undesirable exercises of that power”. In my own words I would say judicial activism means that the judicial branch using their power to declare laws unconstitutional. Judicial restraint is the opposite. It means that the judicial branch refuses to use judicial review.
Before we determine which is right we need to look at the Declaration of Independence. There are certain rights that the government can’t take away from you. These are called the unalienable rights. Their life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
After looking at the rights I believe that judicial activism is in the best interest of the people because it specifically goes over our rights to make sure we have life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
