Judicial activism and judicial restraint?

can anyone describe me the difference between judicial activism and judicial restraint? . why is this important when selecting the executive?

Answers:
In theory -- judicial activism is going beyond the scope of the laws to set social policy (what "should" be), while judicial restraint is only interpreting the laws as necessary (what "must" be) without stretching things beyond what the legislators intended .

In reality -- judicial activism is any result the public doesn't like, and judicial restraint is any result the public likes.


Libs practice activism, cons the latter.
Activism by the Judiciary writes law that would never be voted on by an elective body. The peoples wishes are ignored and by passed.

The choice of executive who believes in restraint protects the voice of the people.

The answers post by the user, for information only, FreeLawAnswer.com does not guarantee the right.

Answer question:


More Law Questions and Answers:
  • Is this kind of survival ok?
  • Give me a list of all U.S state and the age that you can leave home on the side of it like the age of majority
  • How should I really feel paying $500 to propose at a royals game?
  • Pit bulls are banned where I live, and some of my neighbors have been making claims that I own a pit...?
  • If you sue someone in civil court can you get legal fees payed for also?
  • A friend got caught with vicodins and we were wondering if he needed a lawyer to ask for work release?
  • Blocked fire exit?
  • Do you know how much people are making in Wichita Kansas.?
  • What are the difficulties involved with starting my own small-town legal practice after law school?