Date Judicial Activism Judicial activism and judicial restraint are two terms which are bandied about on both sides of the spectrum. Conservatives decry judicial activism. They state that judges should not make law, only interpret the law. However, this is hypocrisy, because conservatives do not seem to mind activism when it comes to issues that they believe in…
Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
Download file to see previous pages
Below is another case of judicial activism, in which a school district had its policies overturned by the court. This should be considered to be activism, as the school district is not allowed by the court to pass policies for itself that would help remedy individual cases of discrimination. However, since this case cases involves reverse discrimination, this case would not be decried by the conservatives who typically decry judicial activism. A. Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District, 551 U.S. 701 (2007). Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District, 551 U.S. 701 (2007) is an equal protection case argued before the court in 2007. Chief Justice John Roberts delivered the opinion of the Court. This case dealt with two different school districts, the Seattle school district in Washington State and the Jefferson County school district in Louisville, Kentucky. Each school district used race as a way to assign students to their schools. The Seattle school district allowed ninth graders to choose the schools that they wanted to attend. If too many students wanted to attend a particular school, then that school used a series of tie-breakers to determine who would attend that school. One of the tie-breakers is the race of the student – in the Seattle school district, 41% of students overall are white, and 59% are non-white. If a particular school did not come within 10% of the 41/59 split – say a school was 60% white and 40% non-white – then race was used to fill the available slots at that particular school, so that it would be brought into balance. Seattle operates the school in this way to address the “racially identifiable housing patterns on school assignments.” Five different schools in the Seattle district used this method of assigning students to their schools, elevating racial characteristics above other merits. The Petitioner parents filed suit on behalf of their children who were denied a spot at the five schools because of their race. The Ninth Circuit Court of appeals decided in an en banc decision that this the school district presented a compelling state interest, achieving racial balance within schools, and that the school district's methods of achieving this racial balance was narrowly tailored, thus upholding the school district's method of apportioning students to these schools. Jefferson County Public Schools had a similar scheme. Their school district is composed of approximately 34 black students, and 66 percent white students. All non-magnet schools in the district were required to enroll a minimum 15 percent and maximum of 50 percent black students. If a certain school was not within this range, students would be denied a spot at that particular school based on that student's race. So, if a black student wanted to enroll in School A, and that school had already reached its 50 maximum of black students, that student would be denied a spot at that school. If a white student wanted to go to School B, and that school was less than 15% black, then that student would be denied a spot at that school. Petitioner Crystal Meredith sought to enroll her son at a school that was close to her house, but her son was denied a spot at that school because her son would have caused that school to be racially
...Download file to see next pagesRead More
Cite this document
(“Judicial Restraint and Judicial Activism Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words”, n.d.)
Retrieved de https://studentshare.org/law/1489845-judicial-restraint-and-judicial-activism
(Judicial Restraint and Judicial Activism Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 Words)
“Judicial Restraint and Judicial Activism Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 Words”, n.d. https://studentshare.org/law/1489845-judicial-restraint-and-judicial-activism.
This essay explores the perceived judicial activism of the (ECJ) in an attempt to create a constitutional foundation for the European Union (EU). Judicial activism in the case of ECJ refers to the political implications of the policies made by the court in its interpretative role (Rasmussen 45) The detractors of the ECJ feel that it promotes European federalism to the detriment of the interests of Member States.
Conclusion I. Introduction Judicial activism and judicial restraint are the two sides of one coin, in which the former presupposes the active involvement of judges and influence of their personal opinion in the rulings’ and the latter is about dealing with the possibilities of judicial overreach.
The traditional meaning of judicial review was illustrated in two instances. First is in Federalist No. 78 and second is in the case of Marbury Vs. Madison (5 U.S. 137). “Laws which are contrary to the Constitution are therefore void because the interpretation of the laws is the proper and peculiar province of the courts (Federalist No.
JUDICIAL ACTIVISM BY EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE . Introduction The European Community Courts have played a decisive role in the integration process of the European Union. The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has especially assumed key role by constantly pursuing legal assimilation in the EU by offering flesh and substance to an outline Treaty, thereby plugging in loopholes in the European laws, and improving the effective implementation of Community law in the provinces of the member states1.
Judicial restraint is when the Court takes the stand that law making is to be left to the legislators and it opposes the nullification of a law only when the Constitution is unquestionably violated. It has been said that 'throughout its history, the Court has claimed to exercise judicial review with restraint, but it has always actively pursued its chosen policies of the moment' (2005).
Thus, it is a usurpation of power and it happens when a judge takes a decision that is different from common law, jurisprudence and the constitution of the country. It may also occur when the decision of judges overrules the prevalent law or legal doctrines in the country that are likely to undermine the country's social policy.
nd only later came to be viewed as a constitutional document.”2 The judicial rulings of the ECJ in the 1960s and 1970s have in effect resulted in a constitutionalization of the treaties establishing the European Union through its jurisprudence. In fact, according to D.
Scalia (1972) asserts that the constitution is supposed to guide the judge to solve any dilemma with a judicial bearing. To a larger extent, the judicial function incorporates interpretation of the provisions of law. However, there are numerous
The Supreme Court acted in an activist manner in the period between 1953 and 1969, and this is in an era when Chief Justice Earl Warren headed the Court. The Warren Court instigated the civil rights onward by suggesting that
Political science as a discipline is advantageous for several reasons one of them being the fact that it makes it easy for those who study it to understand the various systems of justice in different parts of the world. In an attempt to ascertain that passion for justice is maintained and that difficult legal situation are managed satisfactorily.
2 Pages(500 words)Essay
GOT A TRICKY QUESTION? RECEIVE AN ANSWER FROM STUDENTS LIKE YOU!
Save Your Time for More Important Things
Let us write or edit the essay on your topic
"Judicial Restraint and Judicial Activism"
with a personal 20% discount.