Judicial activism and restraint are points of controversy for politicians, general public and the Supreme Court itself. Judicial activism refers to the court's willingness to become involved in major issues and the extent that it makes decisions based on constitutional grounds…
In Roper v. Simmons, a seventeen year old by the name of Simmons confessed that he plotted the murder and burglary of an older woman. This case placed the question before the Courts as to whether or not a person younger than eighteen years old should be punished with the death penalty when convicted of crimes that would typically mandated capital punishment. The seventeen year old was originally sentenced to death for his crimes. This decision was later overturned by the Missouri Supreme Court and the defendant's sentence was converted to life imprisonment. The Missouri Supreme Court stated that although there were cases that illustrated that there was a precedent set that allowed for capital punishment for those persons under the age of eighteen, that a 'national consensus has developed against the execution of juvenile offenders'(2005). This case has since been heard by the United States Supreme Courts. Judicial activism and restraint are concepts that can be readily viewed in the Roper v. Simmons case when it was decided by the Supreme Court in March 2005.
The majority opinion addressed both the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments when considering the affirmation of the Missouri Supreme Court decision. ...
Per the court's opinion, neither the Eighth nor the Fourteenth Amendment disallows the use of the death penalty for either persons that are under the age of eighteen or that are deemed mentally retarded. The Court's majority states that twenty-two of thirty-seven death penalty states permit the death penalty for the offenders that are sixteen years old. The same thirty-seven states permitted the death penalty for those offenders that were seventeen years old. The Court went further to state that such figures are not indicative of a nation that is moving towards a consensus against capital punishment for those offenders that are less than eighteen years of age. Two court cases were consistently referenced in the opinion: Stanford v. Kentucky 492 U.S. 361 (1989) and Atkins v. Virginia 536 U.S. 304(2002). Stanford and Atkins speak to both issues of capital punishment for juvenile offenders and the mentally retarded. These two cases decided that it was not inappropriate to utilize the death penalty for those younger than age eighteen or mentally retarded, respectively. Typically, judicial restraint would have allowed the Supreme Court to overturn the Missouri Courts ruling based on precedents and existing laws. However, the majority opinion took its review of the existing laws by interpreting the intention of the laws and how they related to the intention of the Constitutional Amendments. The majority opinion stated that although the death penalty for youths and the mentally retarded were not prohibited, they were rarely used as methods of punishment. In many cases, the Court notes that allowances were made for juveniles that had committed heinous crimes because it was and is recognized that these persons have ...
Cite this document
(“Judicial activism Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words”, n.d.)
Retrieved from https://studentshare.net/law/275346-judicial-activism
(Judicial Activism Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 Words)
“Judicial Activism Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 Words”, n.d. https://studentshare.net/law/275346-judicial-activism.
This essay explores the perceived judicial activism of the (ECJ) in an attempt to create a constitutional foundation for the European Union (EU). Judicial activism in the case of ECJ refers to the political implications of the policies made by the court in its interpretative role (Rasmussen 45) The detractors of the ECJ feel that it promotes European federalism to the detriment of the interests of Member States.
One of the main functions of the Supreme Court is to pass judgment on the constitutionality of laws passed by Congress. When the Supreme Court passed judgment over the health care laws, it was just exercising its power of judicial review. This power is based on the need to secure the rights of the minority in relation to the majority electorate and the need to ensure justice and fairness for the people.
JUDICIAL ACTIVISM BY EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE . Introduction The European Community Courts have played a decisive role in the integration process of the European Union. The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has especially assumed key role by constantly pursuing legal assimilation in the EU by offering flesh and substance to an outline Treaty, thereby plugging in loopholes in the European laws, and improving the effective implementation of Community law in the provinces of the member states1.
For instance, in Bush v. Gore, 531 US 98 (2000), which is the ultimate case of judicial activism, conservatives did not decry this case as being a case of judicial activism. But, if one reads the opinion, it is clear that the judges are straining to find reasons for the decision, and the reason that they actually found, equal protection, does not fit the case at all.
Thus, it is a usurpation of power and it happens when a judge takes a decision that is different from common law, jurisprudence and the constitution of the country. It may also occur when the decision of judges overrules the prevalent law or legal doctrines in the country that are likely to undermine the country's social policy.
nd only later came to be viewed as a constitutional document.”2 The judicial rulings of the ECJ in the 1960s and 1970s have in effect resulted in a constitutionalization of the treaties establishing the European Union through its jurisprudence. In fact, according to D.
y, thereby plugging in loopholes in the European laws, and improving the effective implementation of Community law in the provinces of the member states1.
In case of ambiguities in the text of the Treaties, ECJ has to employ its creative talents so as to accomplish an
Scalia (1972) asserts that the constitution is supposed to guide the judge to solve any dilemma with a judicial bearing. To a larger extent, the judicial function incorporates interpretation of the provisions of law. However, there are numerous
The Supreme Court acted in an activist manner in the period between 1953 and 1969, and this is in an era when Chief Justice Earl Warren headed the Court. The Warren Court instigated the civil rights onward by suggesting that