Topic > Judicial activism vs. Judicial Restraint in America

As we increasingly rely on our justice system to protect the rights of citizens in the United States, we must revisit the concepts of judicial restraint versus that of judicial activism. The concept of judicial restraint encourages judges to almost “police” themselves when using their judicial powers. According to this concept we are faced with judges who limit the exercise of their power and use it only if they believe that a law or sentence is unconstitutional (Kemic, 2004). The question we then addressed is what determines whether it is truly unconstitutional, since this shows that we have realized that opinions vary on these aspects too. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay When we analyze the differences between judicial restraint and judicial activism, we are actually looking at completely opposite elements. Judicial activism is the interpretation of the Constitution, in which judicial restraint limits the power a judge has to strike down a law and is based on facts without interpretation. In judicial restraint, judges respect the law and do not overturn anything unless it is deemed unconstitutional. Judicial activism has a great influence on social policies that have become increasingly prevalent in our society today. In judicial activism, judges are given the power to overturn sentences and laws when constitutional bodies are deemed not to be acting appropriately. By analyzing the backgrounds and rulings issued under Justice Sotomayor and Justice Thomas, we find a perfect balance between judicial activism through Justice Sotomayor and judicial restraint through Justice Thomas. These two individuals, while working towards the same common goal, have two very different approaches which aided them in their appointment to the Supreme Court as it would allow the bench to be balanced and is believed to help achieve the sentencing outcomes that were needed to continue to push through decisions and keep society at large satisfied with the laws and governments that were taking place.