What is Judicial Activism?

What is Judicial Review?

One of the fundamental ideas in the study of constitutional law is judicial review. It speaks about a court’s power to consider whether laws, executive orders, and government policies are constitutional. Ensuring that these laws and acts are in line with the rights and ideals entrenched in the Constitution is the main goal of judicial review. It functions as a means of maintaining the integrity of a country’s constitutional structure, safeguarding individual rights, and defending the rule of law. The foundation of judicial review is constitutional adjudication. When determining whether a legal or governmental action is constitutional, courts look at how closely it adheres to the language of the Constitution and its guiding principles. Judicial review contributes to the preservation of a country’s constitutional structure and the balance of powers between the several departments of government by examining and, where required, overturning unlawful laws or acts....

What is Judicial Activism?

Contrarily, judicial activism is a legal theory that encourages judges, especially those in higher courts, to interpret the law and influence public policy in an active manner. Judges frequently go above and beyond the literal wording of laws or the constitution in order to further justice and deal with social concerns. Judicial activism can take many different forms, but it is essentially defined by judges influencing their rulings with their own personal values, opinions, and legal interpretations. Aiming for fair and just results, judicial activism frequently takes place in the absence of definite legal precedents or textual backing. Judges can encourage social change by applying their interpretation of the law. Judges who engage in judicial activism frequently incorporate their own views and opinions into their decision-making. They could base their choices on their own moral compass....

Difference between Judicial Review and Judicial Activism

...

Conclusion

Within the legal and judicial sphere, judicial review and judicial activism are two separate but related ideas. Judicial review focuses solely on verifying that laws and acts comply with the constitution and existing legal precedents, whereas, Judicial activism adopts a more proactive and policy-oriented approach, frequently including the personal ideas and values of judges. Understanding the distinctions between these notions is crucial to comprehending the functions and consequences that each concept plays in molding a country’s legal and political landscape....

Judicial Review and Judicial Activism-FAQs

Who holds the charge of judicial review?...