1 / 8

Judicial Activism vs Judicial Review

Judicial Activism vs Judicial Review. As you come in…. Create a political cartoon or comic strip of the case Marbury vs. Madison. Be ready to share. What choices does the Supreme Court have when deciding on a case? Take an active role and do what they believe

lorna
Télécharger la présentation

Judicial Activism vs Judicial Review

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. Judicial Activism vs Judicial Review

  2. As you come in…. • Create a political cartoon or comic strip of the case Marbury vs. Madison. • Be ready to share.

  3. What choices does the Supreme Court have when deciding on a case? • Take an active role and do what they believe • Or they can be very strict as to what the Constitution says.

  4. Use pages 510-511

  5. Judicial Activism • The debate between judicial activism and judicial restraint began in the early days of the United States and continues through the present. A number of prominent Supreme Court justices, from John Marshall to Earl Warren have supported the view of judicial activism, the belief that is the role of judges to make bold policy decisions and possibly even chart new constitutional ground. Judicial activists believe that the other two branches represent the majority of Americans and that they usually make fair decisions for most people. However, sometimes an individual's rights may suffer because he or she is always outvoted by the majority. In this case, the courts are the best branch for defending the individual's rights and making policy to help those who are weak economically or politically. For example, most judicial activists would argue that the rights of African Americans were ignored for decades by Congress and the Presidents. In Brown v. Topeka Board of Education, 1954, the Court set policy, demanding that United States schools which were segregated must integrate with "all due speed."

  6. Judicial Restraint • This philosophy of the courts taking an active role in the policy making process is opposed by the theory of judicial restraint, the belief that the courts should leave policy decisions to the legislative and executive branches. Advocates of this view argue that the federal courts, composed of unelected judges, are the least democratic branch of government, and that judges should not get involved in political questions or conflicts between the other two branches.

  7. Get an iPad • Go to this site: • http://www.oyez.org/

  8. Look up these 3 Court cases. Give the year for each case, give the holding (decision), and finally explain whether the case reflects the philosophy of judicial restraint or activism. Explain the reasons why you chose the philosophy that you did. Use your textbook for further information, as necessary.Hammer v. DagenhartHeart of Atlanta Motel v. USKorematsu v. US

More Related