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

Question

Responses

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 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 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 contrast between judicial restraint and judicial activism in the Supreme Court is:

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

Judicial restraint emphasizes that the court should defer to the decisions of the legislative and executive branches, while judicial activism suggests that the court should take an active role in addressing issues, potentially leading to the suspension or modification of laws or actions deemed unconstitutional.