If a federal justice defers to the decisions of the elected branches of government and believes that she should only strike down laws that clearly violate the Constitution, she likely believes in Group of answer choices
a. judicial construction.
b. judicial restraint.
c. judicial conservatism.
d. judicial activism.
e. judicial originalism.
The correct answer and explanation is:
The correct answer is b. judicial restraint.
Judicial restraint is a philosophy of judicial interpretation that emphasizes limiting the role of the judiciary in making decisions. A judge who practices judicial restraint tends to defer to the elected branches of government, namely the legislature and executive, believing that their decisions reflect the will of the people. This philosophy holds that courts should not interfere with the actions of the legislature unless those actions clearly violate the Constitution. The goal is to avoid judicial overreach and maintain the separation of powers by respecting the authority of elected officials.
Judicial restraint contrasts with judicial activism, which is the belief that judges should be more proactive in interpreting the Constitution and laws, sometimes creating new legal principles or expanding rights, even if the elected branches have not addressed those issues. Judicial activism often involves a broader interpretation of the Constitution, with judges acting as agents of change, which may include striking down laws even if they are not clearly unconstitutional.
Judicial conservatism, on the other hand, typically refers to a preference for traditional values and a strict interpretation of the Constitution, aligning more closely with judicial restraint in some contexts, but it is not synonymous. Judicial construction refers to the interpretation of the Constitution in light of modern contexts, and judicial originalism focuses on interpreting the Constitution according to the original intent of the framers.
Thus, when a federal judge defers to the elected branches and only strikes down laws that clearly violate the Constitution, they are adhering to the principles of judicial restraint. This approach helps maintain the balance of power between the judiciary and the legislative and executive branches.