Preview

Philosophy Of Judicial Restraint

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
249 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Philosophy Of Judicial Restraint
I believe that the judicial restraint philosophy is more appropriate for federal judges to follow because, unlike judicial activism, it does not allow judges to expand vague Constitutional principles to fit their own viewpoint and principles. Judicial restraint does not authorize judges to interpret Constitutional texts and laws (conservative or liberal interpretation) in order to serve their own principles, policies, and considered estimates of the vital needs of contemporary society. The judicial restraint policy also ensures that separation of powers is applied justly so that different branches of government do not intervene with the power of the other branch. Also, because the Stare Decisis has a huge impact on future decisions and precedent,
Continue Reading
View Writing Issues

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Craig Constitutional Interpretation: Chief Justice John Marshall
    • 520 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Craig Constitutional Interpretation: Chief Justice John Marshall

    “Its is emphatically, the province and duty of the judicial department, to say what the law is.” (Ducat, Craig Constitutional Interpretation p. 10) These seventeen words written two hundred years ago made the highest court in the United States supreme, and making it so, Chief Justice John Marshall’s words in that sentence continue to make an impact on every Supreme Court case thereafter. Justice Marshall laid the basic foundations to protect the Federal system that was established by the Constitution. In Marbury v. Madison, McCulloch v. Maryland, and Gibbons v. Ogden the Supreme Court maintained the United States as a federal state.…

    • 520 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Mcdonalds Vs City Of Chicago Judicial Activism
    • 685 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Mcdonalds Vs City Of Chicago Judicial Activism

    Judicial Restraint and Judicial Activism in McDonald v. City of Chicago Judicial Restraint is when the Supreme Court restricts their powers to avoid making any changes to public policy, unless that policy is unconstitutional. When applying judicial restraint to cases, the courts stand by stare decisis (previous decisions of the court), uphold current law, and hold strictly to the text of the Constitution. They think that by only interpreting the constitution and not creating new laws, that they are preserving the laws that this country was founded on. Judicial activism is the opposite.…

    • 685 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Five Philosophies Of Sentencing: 5th, 6th, 14th Amendments
    • 705 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Five Philosophies Of Sentencing: 5th, 6th, 14th Amendments

    The sentencing process can be extremely long or short. Regardless of how long the trials come out to be there is still a process that the court must go through. In this report I’m going to talk about the 5th, 6th, 14th amendments, and discuss the 5 philosophies of sentencing.…

    • 705 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Better Essays

    Judicial Review U S Supreme Court S Main Power
    • 1489 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Judicial Review U S Supreme Court S Main Power

    <html><head></head><body><p>In a nation of democratic governance, the United States has unquestionably succeeded in its own development and potency since the establishment of the Constitution. The United States was founded in hopes of having a truly free, full functioning society. In order to achieve such a goal, the framers of this country drafted the Constitution brilliantly and attentively. With the creation of the three branches, Legislative, Executive, and Judicial, the Constitution also created checks and balances, the capability for each branch to check the power of the others. To ensure the continuing proficiency of our democratic nation and "checks and balances" system, it is crucial to equalize the branches by separating, and equally distributing power among the three branches. However, before 1803, the judicial branch was lacking such said power over the legislative and executive branches. It was not until the case of Marbury v. Madison that Chief Justice Marshall justified the power of judicial review to the judiciary branch, finally obtaining equal leverage among the legislative and executive branches. With the implementation of judicial review, the U.S. Supreme Court has jurisdiction and authority to strike down law, overturn executive acts, and legally bind a public official to properly carry out constitutional duties. Indisputably, the practice of judicial review is the main power of the United States Supreme Court to date.</p>…

    • 1489 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Difference Between Judicial Restraint Theory And Judicial Activism
    • 339 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Difference Between Judicial Restraint Theory And Judicial Activism

    The judicial restraint theory is based off the idea that judges should limit the exercise of their own power. For example, it would make judges think before shooting down laws, just because they can, with the exception being that they are unconstitutional. The opposite of judicial restraint is judicial activism. Judicial activism is when judges make rulings based on politics or personal beliefs rather than the law itself. The main difference between these two philosophies is judicial restraint is a bit more ethical then judicial activism. Both Clarence Thomas and Sonia Sotomayor are minorities to the Supreme Court. However, they both have very different viewpoints when it comes to how their race and background play a role in their rulings.…

    • 339 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Law and Conflicting Perspectives
    • 277 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Law and Conflicting Perspectives

    Composers represent conflicting perspectives through their own unique experiences and values as their political and social contexts. Geoffrey Robertson's self styled memoir 'The Justice Game' written in the late 1900's heavily reflects these conflicting perspectives in the 'Trials of Oz' and 'The Romans in Britain' through the employment of emotive and persuasive language and ridicule in the form of satire to which convey Robertson's view through his eyes. Such conflicts also portrayed in Charles Waterstreet's article' It's a long fickle road to justice' which similar to Robertson's use of persuasive techniques utilizes satire to challenge and question the myopic procedures of the legal system.…

    • 277 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Better Essays

    Judiciary Branch
    • 1492 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Judiciary Branch

    Before comparing the works of writing and the writers’ opinions, it is necessary to know the basic facts about the organization and function of the judicial branch. A key point about this branch is that it is completely split up and organized in such a manner that if a case is appealed in a lower court, it may be brought to a higher court, and so on if necessary. Both court systems, State and Federal, have a series of courts within themselves as well. Above these courts is the Supreme Court, which is the highest court a case may be presented to in our government. This major court is comprised of one Chief Justice and eight Associate Judges, and functions on the basis of seniority. Lower State and Federal court systems must request for judicial review before the Supreme Court may even review the case at hand by deciding if the case is unconstitutional. Not…

    • 1492 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Judicial Restraint Analysis
    • 527 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Judicial Restraint Analysis

    Definition of judicial restraint, mention Marbury V Madison (1803). Set out argument strict constructionists argue that the SC should stick to the original intentions of the FF whilst loose constructionists argue that the SC must reinterpret the Constitution in order to move with the times and bring it up-to-date. Judicial restraint has an impact on many members of US society that are not protected under the original Constitution. Main- All decisions whether restrained or activist have huge political significance. E.g. abortion, Rights of African Americans, etc. If restrained, the court can turn away cases and choose not to even hear them. The SC can pick and choose (they only choose between 90-100 cases to hear a year). Liberals argue…

    • 527 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Philosophy Of Sentencing
    • 851 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Philosophy Of Sentencing

    This paper is written in an attempt to comprehend the sentencing philosophy and purpose of criminal punishment through a review of the historical parameters concerning how sentencing and punishment serve society. Sentencing is the application of justice and the end result of a criminal conviction which is applied by the convening authority; followed by the sentence, or judgement of the court on a convicted offender. What makes punishment unique to our society is the application of our moral or ethical beliefs as a whole, and by the population at large. Throughout history, the sentencing and administration of punishments have been swift, brutal and often times ending with the death of the offender, but in our more civilized and modern society,…

    • 851 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Better Essays

    Discretion in the Criminal Justice System
    • 1914 Words
    • 8 Pages

    Discretion in the Criminal Justice System

    Discretion is the eminence of once behavior or the way of speaking in order to avoid any offensive occurrence or speaking up any private issues or information in public. It is the self-determination for someone to choose or think what should be better to be done in particular circumstances. Especially for a judge, a public official or other private party has the authority to make decisions on any legal matters or other big official subjects. Thus, a person who is authorized with the power of discretion often thinks about how to apply the given supremacy.…

    • 1914 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Better Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Just And Unjust Laws Research Paper
    • 935 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Just And Unjust Laws Research Paper

    Dr.Martin Luther King's Jr "Letter from Birmingham Jail,(1963)" was his response to the public statement of concern and caution issued by eight religious leaders of the south. This concern addressed the controversial issues of segregation between black and white people living in Birmingham .Dr.King included numerous points with his response. One of the main points he explained was about the difference between just and unjust laws."A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law, or the law of God." And "Unjust law is a code that is with out of harmony with moral law (3)."…

    • 935 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Legal - Discretion in the Legal System
    • 1220 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Legal - Discretion in the Legal System

    As a society we believe that offenders should be held accountable for their actions but also treated fairly in the criminal investigation, trial process and sentencing. As a result of this, the power of discretion, that is the ability to choose from a range of options, is granted to some authorities ensure some flexibility for decision making within the system, enabling a more holistic outcome for all parties involved. The issues that explore and reflect the role of discretion within our criminal justice system are police discretion, charge negotiation and judicial discretion in sentencing.…

    • 1220 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Discretion And Court Cases
    • 729 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Discretion And Court Cases

    Discretion varies in each profession just as it does in each jurisdiction. It is how a person in an authoritative position conducts themselves and what they do in accordance with their profession and with ethical obligations as well as the law. Disparity is a major player in the terms of discretion which includes Race, Ethnicity, Gender, and Age. First and foremost society has set the mind frame for this which flows into the courtroom and also statistics have been proven to back up some of this stereotyping ("Reducing racial disparity," 2008). Disparity is ethically wrong but it clearly happens every day in the court. Starting with this…

    • 729 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    The Federal Court System
    • 820 Words
    • 4 Pages

    The Federal Court System

    The first step is vote to render opinion on the case in conference. During this step, the winning side will have 5 or more votes, and the highest ranking justice of majority select who writes the opinion. Then the following steps are opinion, circulate the opinion for others opinions and potential changes, Accept others decision and make changes, then vote again. In this step, majority will announce their opinion. According to the Federal Judiciary PowerPoint, judicial activist is a philosophy of judicial decisions making that argues judges should use their power broadly to further justice, especially in the areas of equality and personal liberty, and the judicial restrained is a philosophy of judicial decision making that argues courts should allow the decisions of other branches of government to stand, even when they offend a judge’s own sense of principles. In my opinion, the judges should be an activist in a court case. Everybody knows the importance of the equality and personal liberty in this country. If the judges regret about a court case offend it, they should be…

    • 820 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Essay On Selective Enforcement
    • 533 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Essay On Selective Enforcement

    A lot of corrupt is happening in police departments today. Not all officers are corrupt, but a lot are found guilty of violations of their code of conduct. Different violations have occurred, such as bribes, theft, perjury, extortion, and selective enforcement. Some officers take bribes to hide records or drop evidence of crimes committed. Also, some officers take bribes to alter testimonies in court and traffic stops. Lately, the most common type of corrupt police officers has been committing has been selective enforcement. Selective enforcement can be when a police officer’s uses a different type of forces to detain towards a specific race of people. Not all officers are corrupt but some are. In 2010, it was reported that 4,861 incidents…

    • 533 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More

Related Topics