1. Socratic Seminar on Judicial Self-Restraint
#66 Woll Reader by John P. Roche

2. SOAPPStone Questions
What is the main idea of this article?

3. In Depth Question #1
“Some authorities, enraged at what the Supreme Court has found the Constitution to mean, have essayed to demonstrate that the framers did not intend the Court to exercise this function, to have, as they put it, ‘The Last Word.’” - How do you feel about this statement? Do you believe that the Constitution does or does not intend for the Supreme Court to have the “Final Word?”

4. In-Depth Question #2
The author discusses two types of judicial self-restraint: Procedural & Substantive. Which of the two do you think the author supports more? Where in the text can you find evidence to support your theory?

5. In Depth Question #3
“The power of the Supreme Court to invade the decision-making arena, …, is a consequence of that fragmentation of political power which is normal in the United States.” What is the author attempting to say here? Do you agree with this statement? Why or why not?

6. In Depth Question #4
“It would be difficult to conceive how a Court having the power to interpret the Constitution could fail to make policy, that is, could fail to make rulings that have general impact on the community as a whole.”
Paul A. Freund
Do you agree or disagree with this statement? How does this affect the ideas of judicial restraint and judicial activism?