What is the contrast between judicial restraint and judicial activism in the Supreme Court?(1 point)

Question

Responses

Judicial restraint means the court does not get involved; judicial activism means the court reviews the action.
Judicial restraint means the court does not get involved; judicial activism means the court reviews the action.

Judicial restraint means the court reviews the action; judicial activism means the court does not get involved.
Judicial restraint means the court reviews the action; judicial activism means the court does not get involved.

Judicial restraint means the court takes ownership of the issues; judicial activism means the court has a lot of power.
Judicial restraint means the court takes ownership of the issues; judicial activism means the court has a lot of power.

Judicial restraint means the court does not include its own preferences; judicial activism means the court is silent on the issues of the branches.
Judicial restraint means the court does not include its own preferences; judicial activism means the court is silent on the issues of the branches.

Answer 1

The correct response is:

Judicial restraint means the court does not get involved; judicial activism means the court reviews the action.

Judicial restraint refers to the principle where courts limit their own power and refrain from striking down laws or overturning government actions, essentially deferring to the other branches of government. In contrast, judicial activism involves courts taking an active role in reviewing and potentially overturning laws or government actions, often based on a broader interpretation of the Constitution or consideration of social issues.