Judicial Activism for Dummies
noun
What does Judicial Activism really mean?
Judicial activism is a term that we often hear in the realm of law and the judiciary. It refers to the philosophy or approach taken by judges when interpreting the law and making decisions in court cases. Now, let's imagine you and your friends are having a game of soccer. Each team has its own set of rules and guidelines to follow. The referee, in this case, is like a judge. They are responsible for applying the rules and making sure the game is fair and just. In the same way, judges in the judicial system are like referees in the court of law. However, sometimes judges have different ways of interpreting the rules or laws, and this is where the concept of judicial activism comes into play.
When judges practice judicial activism, it means they take a more proactive approach in interpreting the law. They may go beyond the strict wording of the law and consider factors like social, political, and moral values that may not be explicitly stated within the legal text. It's like the referee deciding to change the rules of the soccer game halfway through because they believe it will make the match more exciting or fair. Judicial activism is often seen as a way for judges to actively make changes or address societal issues through their interpretations of the law.
On the other hand, there is another approach called judicial restraint, which is like the referee strictly adhering to the rules of the soccer game without any deviations. Judges who practice judicial restraint generally interpret the law based solely on its original intent, following the exact wording and avoiding any personal biases or considerations outside of what is clearly written in the law.
So, to sum it up, judicial activism is when judges take a more active and broad-minded approach to interpreting the law, considering various factors like societal values, while judicial restraint involves a more conservative approach, strictly adhering to the original intent and wording of the law. Both approaches have their pros and cons, and their use can vary depending on the specific context or case at hand.
Revised and Fact checked by Elizabeth Martin on 2023-10-29 13:09:31
Judicial Activism In a sentece
Learn how to use Judicial Activism inside a sentece
- When a judge makes a decision that changes a law or policy instead of just following what already exists, it is called judicial activism. For example, if a judge decides that a law is unfair and goes against people's rights, they might change it to protect those rights.
- Imagine a judge who believes that children should have more rights in our society. If that judge starts making decisions that give children more protections and benefits, even if it means changing existing laws, that is an example of judicial activism.
- Let's say there's a law that says only people above a certain age can vote. If a judge decides that this law is unfair because it excludes some eligible voters, and changes it so that more people can vote, that would be an example of judicial activism.
- Suppose there is a law that allows discrimination against people based on their race or gender. If a judge decides that this law goes against the principles of equality and fairness, and alters it to prohibit such discrimination, that would be an example of judicial activism.
- In some cases, judges have the power to interpret the Constitution. If a judge decides that a law made by the government goes against what the Constitution says, and strikes it down or changes it, that is an example of judicial activism.
Judicial Activism Synonyms
Words that can be interchanged for the original word in the same context.
Judicial Activism Hypernyms
Words that are more generic than the original word.