1 / 15

Consider : What is an “activist” judge?

Consider : What is an “activist” judge?. The Last Word: Assignment #23 for Monday; Collaborize by Fri 3pm . Judicial Philosophy and Decision-Making. Judicial Philosophy. There are generally two ways that judges can look at the Constitution when making a decision:

adeola
Télécharger la présentation

Consider : What is an “activist” judge?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Consider: What is an “activist” judge? The Last Word:Assignment #23 for Monday; Collaborize by Fri 3pm

  2. Judicial Philosophy and Decision-Making

  3. Judicial Philosophy • There are generally two ways that judges can look at the Constitution when making a decision: • Strictconstruction (aka, judicial restraint, or originalism) • This is the belief that laws should not be struck down by the court unless the text of the Constitution specifically forbids them; • Typically, a restraint position would not void a law unless the conflict with the Constitution was explicit, or required little interpretation. • Original intent – meanings of the Constitution can be clarified by examining Founder intentions • Activism (or judicial activism) • Belief that the job of the court is to apply the Constitution to current circumstances, and consider the political, legal, economic or religious circumstances of the day when making decisions. • Typically, an activist position would void laws by pointing to the “spirit” or values embodied in the Constitution as applied to current circumstances

  4. Creating Rights? • An important point to remember is that court decisions really don’t give people “rights” (even the Bill of Rights doesn’t do that per se), but rather that they define the limits of government infringement. • For example, although the result of Roe vs. Wade was effectively to guarantee a woman’s right to an abortion in certain cases, the actual decision was to strike down a law which restricted women from having an abortion. • The language can do both at the same time, and we can talk of “creating rights”, but all that has changed is our interpretation of the Constitution, not the actual text… • So the nullification of government infringement is the creation of a “right” • How might this “right” be taken away? 2 ways…

  5. Public Opinion 9.5 • Can check the power of the courts • Activist periods • May consider public opinion when issuing rulings • Korematsu v. U.S. (1944) • Public confidence in Court • Has ebbed and flowed

  6. http://www.c-span.org/video/?292678-1/original-intent-living-constitution-http://www.c-span.org/video/?292678-1/original-intent-living-constitution-

  7. Judicial Activism and Restraint

  8. Video: Thinking Like a Political Scientist 9.5 http://media.pearsoncmg.com/ph/hss/SSA_SHARED_MEDIA_1/polisci/presidency/Seg4_Judiciary_v2.html

  9. Designed by the molecular gastronomy outfit Molecule-R, this smelly piece of flatware does exactly what you'd imagine something called "The Aromafork" would do. It stinks. There's a little slot on the back for holding "diffusing papers" that you can drop an aromatic essence onto; then, when you take a bite, you also get a whiff of fragrance. The starter kit comes with 21 different aromas, from chocolate to wasabi to truffle to mint. Consider: Does the Court “create” rights? The Last Word:Assignment #23 for Monday; Collaborizepost by Fri 3pm, reply by Monday before class.

  10. Consider this: • Does the commerce clause enable government to ban online gambling? • Does the necessary and proper clause enable government to require people to buy health insurance, or pay a tax? • Does the right to determine a “uniform rule of naturalization” give the federal gov sole control over immigration laws? • Does the 4th amendment prevent government from overhearing cell phone transmissions? • Does the 4th amendment prevent government from intruding on your right to have an abortion? • Does the 8th amendment prohibit government from using the death penalty? • Does equal protection mean gays must be allowed to marry like hetero couples?

  11. Creating Rights? • An important point to remember is that court decisions really don’t give people “rights” (even the Bill of Rights doesn’t do that per se), but rather that they define the limits of government infringement. • For example, although the result of Roe vs. Wade was effectively to guarantee a woman’s right to an abortion in certain cases, the actual decision was to strike down a law which restricted women from having an abortion. • The language can do both at the same time, and we can talk of “creating rights”, but all that has changed is our interpretation of the Constitution, not the actual text… • So the nullification of government infringement is the creation of a “right” • How might this “right” be taken away? 2 ways…

  12. Hollingsworth vs. Perry • Although the Court ruled that the proponents of Prop 8 did not have standing (thus did not rule on the merits of the case), we can discern the nature of the decision on the merits by looking at the district court decision (affirmed by the appeals court), which was effectively upheld by the lack of a Supreme Court intervention. • The district court had ruled that Prop 8 did violate the 14th amendment to the Constitution. • Would you consider this an activist or restraint position?

More Related