The contention that constitution contains moral language that justifies the vigorous protection of individual rights by the judiciary is a view compatible with:

A.judicial restraint.
B.judicial activism.
C.analytical jurisprudence.
D.precedent-based jurisprudence.

I think it's A am not sure.

you're wrong.

Analytical jurisprudence is a legal theory that draws on the resources of modern analytical philosophy to try to understand the nature of law. Since the ...

so your saying it is C

Is this answer right or not.

someone please answer.

Read my response. I told you the answer.

Thank you!

To determine the compatibility of the contention you mentioned, we need to understand the different options provided:

A. Judicial restraint: Judicial restraint refers to judges limiting their own power and deferring to the decisions made by other branches of government, such as the legislature. It generally involves judges interpreting the Constitution narrowly and not actively expanding individual rights.

B. Judicial activism: Judicial activism, on the other hand, refers to judges actively using their power to enforce and expand individual rights, even if it means going beyond the explicit text of the Constitution. It involves judges playing an active role in shaping public policy through their decisions.

C. Analytical jurisprudence: Analytical jurisprudence is a school of legal thought that focuses on the logical analysis of legal concepts and principles. It seeks to understand the nature of law and how it operates, without necessarily advocating for a particular approach to interpreting and applying the law.

D. Precedent-based jurisprudence: Precedent-based jurisprudence, also known as stare decisis, is the principle that courts should follow the rulings and decisions of previous cases when deciding current cases. It emphasizes consistency and stability in the law.

Given the choices, the contention that the constitution contains moral language justifying the vigorous protection of individual rights by the judiciary is most closely associated with:

B. Judicial activism: The view that the constitution contains moral language justifying the vigorous protection of individual rights suggests an approach that actively expands those rights, even if it means going beyond the explicit text of the Constitution. This aligns more closely with the concept of judicial activism.

So, in this case, the answer is B - judicial activism.