How many justices must agree to hear a case on appeal?
(1 point)
A.2
B.3
C.4
D.5
11 answers
C.4
Which standard would a president most likely use to nominate a candidate for the Supreme Court?
(1 point)
A. Does the candidate live close to
Washington, D.C.?
B.Does the candidate's philosophy agree with the president's?
C. Is the candidate well known by the general public?
D. Is the candidate well liked by the House of Representatives?
(1 point)
A. Does the candidate live close to
Washington, D.C.?
B.Does the candidate's philosophy agree with the president's?
C. Is the candidate well known by the general public?
D. Is the candidate well liked by the House of Representatives?
B. Does the candidate's philosophy agree with the president's?
Who has the power to restrict the appellate jurisdiction of federal courts?
(1 point)
A. Congress
B. The president
C. state legislatures
D. U.S. Claims Court
(1 point)
A. Congress
B. The president
C. state legislatures
D. U.S. Claims Court
A. Congress
A company fires an employee for campaigning for a candidate during her own time away from work. The employee files a civil case against the company. A judge rules that the company policy is unconstitutional. What power has the judge used?
(1 point)
A. judicial activism
B. judicial appointment
C. judicial restraint
D. judicial review
(1 point)
A. judicial activism
B. judicial appointment
C. judicial restraint
D. judicial review
D. judicial review
How did the case of Miranda
V. Arizona change the way that the police interact with the people they arrest?
(1 point)
A. Criminal suspects are encouraged to video their interactions with police for later evidence during a trial.
B. Police are prevented from using excessive force to subdue violent offenders who pose a risk to other people.
C. Police officers have to inform criminal suspects of their rights to silence and an attorney before they are questioned.
C. Suspected criminals are required to show proof of identification Or citizenship before being arrested.
V. Arizona change the way that the police interact with the people they arrest?
(1 point)
A. Criminal suspects are encouraged to video their interactions with police for later evidence during a trial.
B. Police are prevented from using excessive force to subdue violent offenders who pose a risk to other people.
C. Police officers have to inform criminal suspects of their rights to silence and an attorney before they are questioned.
C. Suspected criminals are required to show proof of identification Or citizenship before being arrested.
C. Police officers have to inform criminal suspects of their rights to silence and an attorney before they are questioned.
Define judicial activism and judicial restraint. Explain the reasons that judges would exercise activism or restraint, and tell how Plessy v.
Ferguson and Brown v. Board of Education were examples of each.
(4 points)
Ferguson and Brown v. Board of Education were examples of each.
(4 points)
Judicial activism refers to when judges are willing to rule on social or political issues and interpret the law in a way that promotes social change or advances a particular ideology. On the other hand, judicial restraint is when judges limit the exercise of their own power, defer to the legislative or executive branches, and strictly interpret the law without making significant changes or decisions.
Judges might exercise activism when they believe that the law needs to be interpreted in a way that promotes social justice, protects individual rights, or addresses societal problems. They may believe that the Constitution is a living document and should adapt to changing social norms and values.
In contrast, judges might exercise restraint when they believe that the role of the judiciary should be limited and that social or political issues should be handled by elected officials. They may adhere strictly to the original meaning of the law and avoid making decisions that could be seen as overstepping their authority.
Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) was an example of judicial restraint as the Supreme Court upheld racial segregation under the doctrine of "separate but equal." The Court deferred to the legislative branch's authority to enact laws, even if they were discriminatory, and did not challenge the status quo.
Brown v. Board of Education (1954) was an example of judicial activism as the Supreme Court ruled that racial segregation in public schools was unconstitutional. The Court actively challenged the status quo and interpreted the Constitution in a way that promoted equality and civil rights.
In summary, judicial activism involves judges taking an active role in shaping society through legal decisions, while judicial restraint involves judges limiting their power and deferring to the other branches of government.
Judges might exercise activism when they believe that the law needs to be interpreted in a way that promotes social justice, protects individual rights, or addresses societal problems. They may believe that the Constitution is a living document and should adapt to changing social norms and values.
In contrast, judges might exercise restraint when they believe that the role of the judiciary should be limited and that social or political issues should be handled by elected officials. They may adhere strictly to the original meaning of the law and avoid making decisions that could be seen as overstepping their authority.
Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) was an example of judicial restraint as the Supreme Court upheld racial segregation under the doctrine of "separate but equal." The Court deferred to the legislative branch's authority to enact laws, even if they were discriminatory, and did not challenge the status quo.
Brown v. Board of Education (1954) was an example of judicial activism as the Supreme Court ruled that racial segregation in public schools was unconstitutional. The Court actively challenged the status quo and interpreted the Constitution in a way that promoted equality and civil rights.
In summary, judicial activism involves judges taking an active role in shaping society through legal decisions, while judicial restraint involves judges limiting their power and deferring to the other branches of government.
78 answers