10
Judicial Activism v. Judicial Restraint Unit 4: Institutions

Unit 4: Institutions. A. Philosophy that the courts should take an active role in solving social, economic, and political problems B. Courts should

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Unit 4: Institutions. A. Philosophy that the courts should take an active role in solving social, economic, and political problems B. Courts should

Judicial Activism v. Judicial Restraint

Unit 4: Institutions

Page 2: Unit 4: Institutions. A. Philosophy that the courts should take an active role in solving social, economic, and political problems B. Courts should

I. Judicial activism

Page 3: Unit 4: Institutions. A. Philosophy that the courts should take an active role in solving social, economic, and political problems B. Courts should

A. Philosophy that the courts should take an active role in solving social, economic, and

political problemsB. Courts should uphold the “guardian ethic”: they act as

a guardian of the people

Page 4: Unit 4: Institutions. A. Philosophy that the courts should take an active role in solving social, economic, and political problems B. Courts should

C. Examples of Court striking down laws using judicial activism

1. Texas v. Johnson, 1989- Flag burning

2. Clinton v. NY, 1998- Line Item Veto3. Bush v. Gore, 2000- Florida

recount of election4. Atkins v. Virg, 2002-Death

Penalties for mentally disabled5. Lawrence v. Texas 2003-Sodomy

in Texas

Page 5: Unit 4: Institutions. A. Philosophy that the courts should take an active role in solving social, economic, and political problems B. Courts should

II. Judicial Restraint

A. Philosophy that the courts should allow the states and the other two branches of the federal government to solve social, economic, and political problems

B. Constitutional Questions C. Interpret v. make lawD. Original Intent of founders

Page 6: Unit 4: Institutions. A. Philosophy that the courts should take an active role in solving social, economic, and political problems B. Courts should

III. Historical Landmark Cases

Page 7: Unit 4: Institutions. A. Philosophy that the courts should take an active role in solving social, economic, and political problems B. Courts should

A. (Warren Court 1953-1969)-Exs of activism [conservatives not happy]

1. Rights of the accused, i.e. requiring police to issue “Miranda warnings”-Miranda v. Arizona

2. Civil rights, i.e. desegregating public schools in -Brown v. Board

3. Civil liberties, i.e. prohibiting prayer in school- -Engle v. Vitale

Page 8: Unit 4: Institutions. A. Philosophy that the courts should take an active role in solving social, economic, and political problems B. Courts should

B. The Burger Court (1969-1986)

1. Roe v. Wade (1973)- Abortion 2. UC Regents v. Bakke (1978)-

Affirmative Action

C. Rehnquist Court (1986-2005) 3. Overturning of liberal precedents

from past

Exs:a) Overturning Gun Free School Zones Act-

U.S. v Lopezb) Overturning Florida Supreme Court

decisions in election 2000-Bush v. Gore

Page 9: Unit 4: Institutions. A. Philosophy that the courts should take an active role in solving social, economic, and political problems B. Courts should

C. Roberts Court (2005-present)

1. Has been said to run court just like Rehnquist

2. Trend is pointing to a more conservative court

3. Issues in court today: 4th amendment, environmental law, gay marriage, Voting Rts Act, campaign finance, privacy, Obamacare, Religious Freedom

Page 10: Unit 4: Institutions. A. Philosophy that the courts should take an active role in solving social, economic, and political problems B. Courts should

Lecture DQs

1. Identify judicial restraint & judicial activism

2. Discuss 1 case as an example of judicial activism

3. Discuss 1 case as example of judicial restraint