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. (Write as a seventh grader)
Judicial activism is when judges make decisions based on their own beliefs and values rather than just following the laws. Judicial restraint, on the other hand, is when judges stick to the laws and interpret them as they are written.
Judges might exercise activism if they believe a law is unfair or outdated and needs to be changed. They might use their power to make decisions that they believe will lead to a more just society. On the other hand, judges might exercise restraint if they believe it is not their job to make laws, but to interpret and apply them as they are written.
In Plessy v. Ferguson, the Supreme Court showed judicial restraint by upholding segregation laws in the United States. The court believed that the laws were constitutional and did not need to be changed. This decision upheld the status quo and did not challenge the laws in place at the time.
In Brown v. Board of Education, on the other hand, the Supreme Court showed judicial activism by ruling that segregation in schools was unconstitutional. The court believed that the laws allowing for separate schools for black and white students were unfair and needed to be changed. This decision was a major step towards ending segregation in the United States and promoting equality for all.
Can you make it shorter please.
Judicial activism is when judges make decisions based on their personal beliefs, while judicial restraint is when judges stick to the laws as they are written. Judges might be activist if they believe a law is unfair and needs to change, while they might be restrained if they feel it is not their job to make laws.
In Plessy v. Ferguson, the court showed restraint by upholding segregation laws. This meant they didn't challenge the laws in place. In Brown v. Board of Education, the court showed activism by ruling that segregation in schools was not fair. This decision helped end segregation and promote equality.