Free Judicial Activism Essay Sample
Judicial activism principle outlines the judicial ruling that is suspected of using political and other individual based standards other than the rule of the stipulated laws. It is a philosophy related to the decision making in the judicial perspectives, which describes the instances of a judge allowing his personal and individual motives on a mater such as the policies related to common public to influence their verdict. It is an overturn of the laws that are governed by the constitution as well as the judicial precedent and giving a ruling that is against the stipulated constitutional confines of the relative law.
Argument for and against Supreme Court practice of activism
A supreme court may practice Judaism due to various reasons. For instance in a the M.vs. H case, the plaintiff was seeking the recognition of same sex marriages and the rights of gays. It is a case that if it were not of judicial activism, it could have been thrown out in the lower courts. This was one f the cases that did overthrow the unjust laws for the sake of delivering democracy to Canadians. Usage of the charter by the supreme courts that was enacted by the government, which was elected into office by public, is not a compromise of any law. It is just the same as using any other law, hence giving the Supreme Court a defense in relation to judicial activism.
The practice of judicial activism by the supreme courts does limit the exercising of their own power. It is the goal of the judiciary to uphold the defined law through the embracing of stare decisis principle, but the Supreme Court have their set of rights. Through judicial activism, judges do not only interpret the law but they too make laws, which is abusive to their power in the constitution. Due to this, the practice of judicial activism should not be allowed in supreme courts.
In Bush vs. Gore, the United States landmark Supreme Court judges voted in favor of President Bush. It was a case where five judges did vote for President Bush against four for Gore. Through party lines, the voting was done and this is one of the instances where the judicial activism was practiced most.