NCJ Number
110590
Date Published
1988
Length
11 pages
Annotation
'Judicial activism,' as opposed in the thought of Professor Raoul Berger and Judge Robert Bork, is undemocratic.
Abstract
'Judicial activism' consists of 'those acts of the judiciary that are unjustified, that are without constitutional or legal warrant, and that close off questions that should remain open in a democracy.' Judicial activism invades those areas which should remain the province of those branches of government elected by the people. A democracy requires that the laws and policies that govern a society's life be established by persons elected by and responsive to citizens. Although all actions by various branches of local, State, and Federal governments in the United States should properly be subject to judicial review to ensure that a governmental body not act outside the parameters of the U.S. Constitution, Federal Courts must be careful not to overturn legislation and governmental policy that is not a clear violation of the Constitution. When a court does this, it imposes its will on a people without regard to their will as expressed through the actions of elected representatives.