Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Judicial restraint is a judicial interpretation that recommends favoring the status quo in judicial activities and is the opposite of judicial activism.Aspects of judicial restraint include the principle of stare decisis (that new decisions should be consistent with previous decisions); a conservative approach to standing and a reluctance to grant certiorari; [1] and a tendency to deliver ...
Judicial activism is a judicial philosophy holding that courts can and should go beyond the applicable law to consider broader societal implications of their decisions. It is sometimes used as an antonym of judicial restraint . [ 1 ]
Opponents of the doctrine tend to use the term as an epithet synonymous with "judicial activism" (itself a hotly-debated phrase). However, just as some conservative theorists have embraced the term Constitution in Exile , which similarly gained popularity through use by liberal critics, textualism was a term that had pejorative connotations ...
The avoidance doctrine flows from the canon of judicial restraint and is intertwined with the debate over the proper scope of federal judicial review and the allocation of power among the three branches of the federal government and the states. It is also premised on the "delicacy" and the "finality" of judicial review of legislation for ...
Largely associated with Cass R. Sunstein, it is a viewpoint which criticizes the more conservative stance of originalism as being judicial activism in disguise. Minimalists believe that a faithful application of originalist theory would result in a system of constitutional law in which modern societal standards would be ignored, in favor of the now-antiquated opinions held by the Founding ...
Trump needs a quick win. Even the endorsement from Trump, who has crushed most Republican resistance to his MAGA movement, cannot guarantee that Johnson will triumph as unified conservative rule ...
(The Center Square) — Maine Supreme Judicial Court Justice Catherine Connors should be reprimanded for failing to recuse herself in two recent foreclosure cases despite a possible conflict of ...
the Sam Sheppard case, defendant's right to a fair trial vs. freedom of the press: Miranda v. Arizona: Criminal procedure: 384 U.S. 436 (1966) self-incrimination ("right to remain silent") Federal Trade Commission v. Dean Foods Co. 384 U.S. 597 (1966)