Concept of Judicial Activism

However, the courtsÆ undemocratic nature also can be a benefit. Courts are not subject to political pressure, which allows them to make unpopular rulings without fear of retribution at the ballot box. That facet of the courts has prompted many to call for ôjudicial activismö because some issues are just too difficult to resolve in the political branches of government. Thus, they argue that judges, with their insulated positions and largely unbridled power, must resolve certain issues for the good of the country. This paper will argue that while judicial activism served its purpose during the Civil Rights Era, as a general rule it is a dangerous concept that is only appropriate in extraordinary situations.

Traditionally, courts follow the doctrine of judicial restraint. According to this rule, the judiciary should be ôhighly respectful of precedent and should defer to the judgment of legislatures.ö In a democratic government, those who are elected by the

. . .
seemingly intractable social problems. Advocates point to the Warren Court (1953-1969). Many of its decision were unpopular at the time, yet today the court of Chief Justice Earl Warren is mostly lauded for its activism and its impact on the Civil Rights movement (Patterson 424-425). In this century, however, judicial activism has taken three different forms. In the early part of the 20th century (indeed, dating back the 1860s), the U.S. Supreme Court consistently frustrated the will of the majority and instead relied upon the justicesÆ world view. During this first stage of judicial activismùnamed the Lochner era after a famous case from 1905ùthe Court struck down numerous laws designed to protect workers and women and children. The justices simply substituted their views for those of the public, which overwhelmingly supported the laws (Shane). Judicial activism assumed a second form in 1953, when Earl Warren became Chief Justice. A year later, the Court handed down its landmark decision in Brown v. Board of Education. The states refused to abide by the ruling, forcing the federal government to intervene. Brown proved to be only the first of many decisions by the Warren Court that reshaped American laws concerning race,
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
Rights Era, Warren Court, Habeas Corpus, Federal Courts, Supreme Court, Rehnquist Court, Instead RehnquistÆs, William Brennan, , Civil Rights, judicial activism, judicial restraint, warren court, argue judges, rehnquistÆs defenders, judicial activism assumed, civil rights, limited circumstances, undemocratic institution, judges wield, political pressure, shane judicial activism, judiciary undemocratic institution,
Approximate Word count = 1210
Approximate Pages = 5 (250 words per page)

More Essays on Concept of Judicial Activism