Judicial activism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Judicial activism is a critical term used to describe judicial rulings that impose a personal biased interpretation by a given court of what a law means as opposed to what a neutral, unbiased observe...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_activism
Like many catchwords, "judicial activism" has acquired so many different meanings as to obscure more than it reveals. Yet it is not a term that can simply be ignored as intellectually "void for vagueness," for at the heart of it are concerns about the very meaning and survival of law.
www.tsowell.com/judicial.htm www.tsowell.com/judicial.htm
[See also: judicial restraint, judicial review] ... Judicial restraint ... Judicial review...
www.auburn.edu/~johnspm/gloss/judicial_activism www.auburn.edu/~johnspm/gloss/judicial_activism
Judicial activism is when courts do not confine themselves to reasonable interpretations of laws, but instead create law. Alternatively, judicial activism is when courts do not limit their ruling to the dispute before them, but instead establish a new rule to apply broadly to issues not presented in the specific action.
www.conservapedia.com/Judicial_Activism www.conservapedia.com/Judicial_Activism
Definition of Judicial Activism – the process by which judges take an active role in the governing process. ... Judicial activist believe in a more affirmative and aggressive judicial policy.
fs.huntingdon.edu/jlewis/Syl/499/499IsbellShow/tsld003.... fs.huntingdon.edu/jlewis/Syl/499/499IsbellShow/tsld003.htm
Judicial Activism The charge that judges are going beyond their appropriate powers and engaging in making law and not merely interpreting it ... A long period of American history was characterized by conservative judicial activism, by a Supreme Court unwilling to allow the states or Congress to pass legislation that...
www.answers.com/topic/judicial-activism www.answers.com/topic/judicial-activism
"Judicial activism" has become an appellation of choice in the current debate about the role of judges and justices in American government. Most prominently, right now, it's used by Democrats to attack the President's judicial nominees, and by Republicans to attack judges who reach results of which they do not approve.
writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20050617.html
The terms "judicial restraint" and "judicial activism" describe how a judge judges, that is, how he applies the law to facts in the cases before him. The difference is that restrained judges take the law as it is and activist judges make up the law as they go along.
www.criminalgovernment.com/docs/activism.html www.criminalgovernment.com/docs/activism.html
Restraint should not mean failure to act to protect the constitution ... Most political conservatives believe in the principle of judicial restraint. I share that conviction, but I also believe in judicial activism. My purpose today is to make a case for principled judicial activism.
www.heritage.org/Research/LegalIssues/HL456.cfm