Which are the main philosophies of judicial interpretation? Select all that apply.
A.judicial activism
B.judicial jurisdiction
C.judicial restraint
D.judicial review
E.judicial standing
A.judicial activism
C.judicial restraint
D.judicial review
The main philosophies of judicial interpretation are:
A. Judicial activism: This philosophy emphasizes an active role for judges in shaping public policy and interpreting the law in light of changing societal values and needs.
C. Judicial restraint: This philosophy advocates for judges to exercise self-restraint and limit their interpretations to what is explicitly stated in the law, allowing the legislative branch to make policy decisions.
D. Judicial review: This principle allows the courts to review and assess the constitutionality of laws and governmental actions.
E. Judicial standing: While not a philosophy of interpretation, judicial standing refers to the legal requirement for a person or entity to have a sufficient personal stake in a case in order to bring it before the court.
To identify the main philosophies of judicial interpretation, we need to understand the concepts associated with each option.
A. Judicial activism: This philosophy suggests that judges should actively interpret the Constitution and laws in a way that promotes social change and justice. It involves taking an expansive view of the law and is often associated with a broader interpretation of the Constitution.
B. Judicial jurisdiction: Jurisdiction refers to the authority of a court to hear and decide a case. While it is a crucial aspect of the legal system, it is not a philosophy of judicial interpretation. Therefore, B is not one of the main philosophies.
C. Judicial restraint: Unlike judicial activism, judicial restraint calls for judges to limit their interpretation strictly to the text and original intent of the Constitution and laws. Adherents of this philosophy believe that the role of judges is to apply the law, not create or change it.
D. Judicial review: This philosophy involves the power of the courts to review and invalidate laws or government actions that are deemed unconstitutional. Judicial review grants the judiciary branch the authority to interpret and strike down laws inconsistent with the Constitution.
E. Judicial standing: Judicial standing refers to the legal requirement that a person must have a sufficient interest or stake in a matter to bring a case to court. While it is an important consideration for bringing a lawsuit, it is not a philosophy of judicial interpretation.
Considering the explanations, the main philosophies of judicial interpretation are:
A. Judicial activism
C. Judicial restraint
D. Judicial review
Therefore, the correct options are A, C, and D.