Block, SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit
752
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 6:
Line 6: + +
no edit summary
Judicial activism should not be confused with the courts' [[United States Constitution|Constitutionally]] mandated rule in enforcing [[limited government|limitations on government power]] and preserving the Constitutional structure of government, as they did in ''[[Bush v. Gore]],'' ''[[Boy Scouts v. Dale]],'' and ''[[D.C. v. Heller]],'' and as the [[Supreme Court of the United States]] should have done with [[ObamaCare]].
Judicial activism should not be confused with the courts' [[United States Constitution|Constitutionally]] mandated rule in enforcing [[limited government|limitations on government power]] and preserving the Constitutional structure of government, as they did in ''[[Bush v. Gore]],'' ''[[Boy Scouts v. Dale]],'' and ''[[D.C. v. Heller]],'' and as the [[Supreme Court of the United States]] should have done with [[ObamaCare]].
Judicial activism can occasionally have a positive impact, although this impact can typically be better achieved by other methods. Many have cited [[Bolling v. Sharpe]], the companion case to [[Brown v. Board of Education]], which desegrated schools in [[Washington, D.C.]] as an example. The [[Equal Protection Clause]], which was cited in Brown, does not apply to the District of Columbia, only to the States. However, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that segregated schools in the city were still unconstitutional because it was also a violation of the [[due process]] clause of the Fifth Amendment. Although the impact was clearly desirable, the due process clause typically only applies to legal processes such as criminal trials, not to segregation. Also, the same result could have been achieved simply by an act of Congress, since they have control over the District's school system. Legal scholars Cass Sunstein and Randy Barnett agreed in a debate that it was hard to reconcile the ruling with the Constitution, in spite of its positive impact.<ref>[http://legalaffairs.org/webexclusive/debateclub_cie0505.msp]</ref> These rare cases are therefore among the hardest for the Supreme Court to decide.
==Examples==
==Examples==