StudentShare
Contact Us
Sign In / Sign Up for FREE
Search
Go to advanced search...
Free

Judicial Activism and Constitutional Interpretation - Assignment Example

Cite this document
Summary
The paper “Judicial Activism and Constitutional Interpretation” defines judicial activism, argues about the correct interpretation of the constitution and about the difference in philosophy between strict constructionists and those who believe in a living constitution. …
Download full paper File format: .doc, available for editing
GRAB THE BEST PAPER94.4% of users find it useful
Judicial Activism and Constitutional Interpretation
Read Text Preview

Extract of sample "Judicial Activism and Constitutional Interpretation"

Judicial activism and constitutional interpretationWhat is Judicial Activism?Judicial Activism is the act of a Judge to decide upon a case on his own without referring to the constitution or against the public law. Judges are to abide by the provisions of constitution and the common law, which protect the public interest. But, in a very few cases, they are pressurized to protect the personal interest of a group of people by virtue of political ideologies and/or for personal gain. 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. The United States of America has a checking system of judicial activism to ensure that it is minimal and public interests are mostly protected. According to Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law, judicial activism is "the practice in the judiciary of protecting or expanding individual rights through decisions that depart from established precedent or are independent of or in opposition to supposed constitutional or legislative intent" (Jha).

What is the difference in philosophy between strict constructionists and those who believe in a living constitution?The supporters of judicial interpretations have different philosophies and the most debated among them are strict constructionists and those who believe in living constitution. A strict constructionist is one who believes that the words and phrases used in the law and constitution are static and hence there are limited instances of interpretations. U.S. Supreme Court nominee John Roberts has been dubbed a "strict constructionist" -- someone who believes the U.S. Constitution should be interpreted exactly as its original authors intended” (Chadwick Alex).

The main outcome of this philosophy is that judgment is based on what is written in the law and not on what it should be. Some of the popular supporters of this argument include Supreme Court of the United States Justice Hugo Black and former U.S. Chief Justice William Rehnquist, and Chief Justice of Australia, Owen Dixon. In contrast to the strict constructionism, living constitutionalists are of the view that the law words and phrases are not static and should be treated as living and dynamic and they must be interpreted in such a manner that they are useful for the changing societal needs.

As opined by David Dieteman on living constitution, it is “one of the most nefarious influences in the minds of Americans is the notion that the federal constitution of 1787 (the "U.S. Constitution") is a "living" document” (Dieteman David). Therefore, the words and phrases in the law and constitution framed by Congress do not mean the same thing at different time points. Thinking critically about these arguments what do you believe? How should judicial activism be defined? And whose interpretation of the constitution is correct, if any?

The law and constitutional provisions framed at one time in the past need not be operational in a social environment, which is subject to perennial changes. The law should be interpreted as they are meeting the constitutional rights of the populace in the country. However, they should not be used for the benefit of a group of people to protect their vested interest and the judges should affirm that the country’s judiciary is not influenced by the political ideologies and vested interests. In a study undertaken by Paul Gewirtz and Chad Golder, it is found that justices vary on their views to deviate from what was intended by the legislatures.

The study observes that “striking down Congressional legislation is sometimes justified and some activism is necessary and proper” (Gewirtz Paul, 2005). Thus, what is appropriate to a judge may not be so to another. The validity is checked by taking into account the need of the given situation and the views of the judge. Judicial activism, therefore, may be defined as the act of deviating from the meaning and significance of the law words and phrases, by judges on the basis subjective views that likely to protect the interest of a vested group.

The living constitution philosophy seems to be more practical and committed as they conform to the requirements of the present. Work CitedChadwich Alex. Slate’s Jurisprudence: A Living U.S. Constitution? Npr.org. August 30, 2005. 29 January, 2009. Dieteman David. The Living Constitution. Lewrockwell.com. December, 2000. 29 January 2009. Jha Pritha, (Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law). Judicial Activism at its best and perhaps, its worst. 29 January 2009. Gewits Paul & Chand Golder (2005), So Who Are the Activists?

The New York Times. July 6, 2005. 29 January 2009.

Read More
Cite this document
  • APA
  • MLA
  • CHICAGO
(“Judicial Activism and Constitutional Interpretation Assignment”, n.d.)
Judicial Activism and Constitutional Interpretation Assignment. Retrieved from https://studentshare.org/law/1527559-judicial-activism-essay
(Judicial Activism and Constitutional Interpretation Assignment)
Judicial Activism and Constitutional Interpretation Assignment. https://studentshare.org/law/1527559-judicial-activism-essay.
“Judicial Activism and Constitutional Interpretation Assignment”, n.d. https://studentshare.org/law/1527559-judicial-activism-essay.
  • Cited: 0 times

CHECK THESE SAMPLES OF Judicial Activism and Constitutional Interpretation

Judicial Review in the UK and the USA

Judicial review was exercised even before that constitutional Convention in several states.... In the paper “judicial Review in the UK and the USA” the author compares judicial reviews in both countries.... In the UK, judicial review is accomplished when a court in Wales supervises the exercise of public power.... In the USA the constitution fails to explicitly put in place the aspect of judicial review....
6 Pages (1500 words) Essay

The Doctrine of Judicial Activism

JUDICIAL REVIEW According to Wolfe, “Judicial review is the series of checks and balances within a definite government can be seen most clearly by examining its approach to constitutional interpretation and its manner of exercising judicial review” (10).... JUDICIAL REVIEW According to Wolfe, “Judicial review is the series of checks and balances within a definite government can be seen most clearly by examining its approach to constitutional interpretation and its manner of exercising judicial review” (10)....
1 Pages (250 words) Essay

Judicial Activism at the US Supreme Court

Although many groups declare that the decision of the Supreme Court is part of judicial activism, there is insufficient proof to support judicial activism.... judicial activism was not apparent in the recent Supreme Court decision even if the decision imposed certain changes in the law being passed.... 5 Judicial review………………………………………………………………… 5 judicial activism………………………………………………………………....
8 Pages (2000 words) Essay

Bringing Home Global Rules

However, there is a growing tendency for national courts to have regard to these international norms for the purpose of deciding cases where the domestic law - whether constitutional, statute or common law - is uncertain or incomplete.... This trans-judicial communication is seen not only in the application of international norms but also in the recourse to comparative law, particularly in the area of constitutional law....
7 Pages (1750 words) Term Paper

The Constitutional Jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice

, the judicial activism of the European Court of Justice has been one of the most intriguing aspects of the evolving legal and judicial framework in Europe, because it “appoints the European Court as meeting place between the legal order of the Community and those of its member states.... As a result, this has often required creative judicial interpretation that has caused it to be accused of judicial activism.... ??7 The factor that will determine when judicial activity strays into the field of judicial activism is determined by the extent to which the judicial function strays into the political realm....
12 Pages (3000 words) Essay

Judiciary in US Federal System

In the upcoming debate we will look to see the role of US Supreme Court in interpretation of the We will also seek to understand the challenges with regard to such compliance.... The Legislative branch governed under Article 1 of the Constitution, The Executive Branch governed under Article 2 of the Constitution and The judicial Branch governed under Article 3 of the Constitution.... As per Article 3, The judicial Branch is headed by US Supreme court....
7 Pages (1750 words) Essay

Judicial Activism and Judicial Restraint

It states that judges should Judiciary assignment al affiliation) Describe judicial activism and judicial restraint Judicial activism is a legal ruling that is assumed to be based on political or personal consideration rather than on the existing act or law.... or decades, Republican Party leaders have decried judicial activism and championed for judicial restraint.... Legal activism definition is a contentious issue in the United States of America, and its questions are often related to statutory construction, constitutional interpretation and separation of powers....
2 Pages (500 words) Essay

Judicial Activism and Judicial Restraint in the US

The main aim of this paper under the title "judicial activism and Judicial Restraint in the US" touches upon the information about constitutional powers in the United States and the search for the right balance between judicial activism and Judicial Restraint.... hellip; 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....
8 Pages (2000 words) Research Paper
sponsored ads
We use cookies to create the best experience for you. Keep on browsing if you are OK with that, or find out how to manage cookies.
Contact Us