Judicial Restraint vs. Judicial Activism & Judicial Branch Checks

Judicial Restraint The belief that a case should be interpreted on the basis of:The belief that a case should be interpreted on the basis of: –the original intent of the Constitution; –the intent of those who enacted the law; –and precedent Laws should only be overturned when a CLEAR violation of the Constitution is presentLaws should only be overturned when a CLEAR violation of the Constitution is present Courts should interpret the law, not make lawCourts should interpret the law, not make law Ex. – Dred Scott vs. SanfordEx. – Dred Scott vs. Sanford

Judicial Activism The belief that a the Constitution and existing laws should be interpreted on the basis of:The belief that a the Constitution and existing laws should be interpreted on the basis of: –on going changes in beliefs, values, and conditions Courts should take an active role in solving social, economic, and political problemsCourts should take an active role in solving social, economic, and political problems Courts should act as a “guardian of the people”Courts should act as a “guardian of the people” Ex. – Gideon vs. Wainwright (states should provide legal representation to the poor)Ex. – Gideon vs. Wainwright (states should provide legal representation to the poor)

Judicial Branch Checks and Balances LegislativeLegislative –Pass constitutional amendments to legalize a policy that the SCOTUS ruled unconstitutional 26 th Amendment26 th Amendment –Passing a new law –Confirming the President’s judicial appointments ExecutiveExecutive –Judicial Appointments –Refuse to obey SCOTUS decisions Andrew JacksonAndrew Jackson

King vs. Burwell Summarize the arguments for both sides of the case.Summarize the arguments for both sides of the case. How would the Supreme Court rule if the followed the idea of judicial restraint, and why?How would the Supreme Court rule if the followed the idea of judicial restraint, and why? How would they rule if the followed judicial activism, and why?How would they rule if the followed judicial activism, and why?