Question

Supreme Court justices who support judicial activism and those who support judicial restraint most disagree on the answer to which question? (APEX)

A. What is the value of concurring opinions that agree with a majority opinion

B. How should new justices be selected for the Supreme Court in the event of vacancy

C. To what extent should the Supreme Court work to promote social progress

D. Should the Supreme Court rule on cases that have already been heard by lower courts

Answer 1

Answer: How important is the original intent of the Constitution when deciding cases?

Explanation:

Did the test

Answer 2

Answer:

The correct question to which the two judges will disagree is option (c) To what extent the supreme court should work to promote social progress.

Explanation:

Judicial Activism:

• Judicial activism, an approach to the exercise of review , or an outline of a particular judicial decision, during which a judge is generally considered more willing to decide on constitutional issues and to invalidate executive or legislative actions.
• Although debates over the right role of the judiciary date to the founding of the American republic, the phrase broad interpretation appears to have been coined by the American historian Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., during a 1947 article in Fortune.

Judicial Restraint:

• Judicial restraint is that the refusal to exercise judicial review in deference to the process of ordinary politics. Judicial restraint may be a procedural or substantive approach to the exercise of judicial review.
• As a procedural doctrine, the principle of restraint urges judges to refrain from deciding legal issues, and particularly constitutional ones, unless the choice is necessary to the resolution of a concrete dispute between adverse parties.

#SPJ2