Judicial restraint
Encyclopedia
Judicial restraint is a theory of judicial interpretation
that encourages judge
s to limit the exercise of their own power. It asserts that judges should hesitate to strike down laws unless they are obviously unconstitutional. It is sometimes regarded as the opposite of judicial activism
.
In deciding questions of constitutional law
, judicially-restrained jurists go to great lengths to defer to the legislature. Judicial restraint requires the judge to uphold a law whenever possible. Former Associate Justice Felix Frankfurter
, a Democrat appointed by Franklin Roosevelt, is generally seen as the "model of judicial restraint".
Judicially-restrained judges respect stare decisis
, the principle of upholding established precedent handed down by past judges. When the late Chief Justice Rehnquist
overturned some of the precedents of the Warren Court, Time magazine said he was not following the theory of judicial restraint.
argue that judges should put great emphasis on adherence to stare decisis
and precedent
. Minimalists argue that judges should make only minor, incremental changes to constitutional law in order to maintain that stability. They ask judges to do this by creating small, case-specific rulings rather than broad, sweeping rulings.
doctrine encourages courts to decline to rule in certain categories of controversial cases. Under this theory, a court acknowledges that the Constitution might have been violated but declines to act. It is often described as a type of judicial restraint, although it can be considered a form of judicial activism against plaintiffs whose rights have been violated and find their cases dismissed.
Judicial interpretation
Judicial interpretation is a theory or mode of thought that explains how the judiciary should interpret the law, particularly constitutional documents and legislation...
that encourages judge
Judge
A judge is a person who presides over court proceedings, either alone or as part of a panel of judges. The powers, functions, method of appointment, discipline, and training of judges vary widely across different jurisdictions. The judge is supposed to conduct the trial impartially and in an open...
s to limit the exercise of their own power. It asserts that judges should hesitate to strike down laws unless they are obviously unconstitutional. It is sometimes regarded as the opposite of judicial activism
Judicial activism
Judicial activism describes judicial ruling suspected of being based on personal or political considerations rather than on existing law. It is sometimes used as an antonym of judicial restraint. The definition of judicial activism, and which specific decisions are activist, is a controversial...
.
In deciding questions of constitutional law
Constitutional law
Constitutional law is the body of law which defines the relationship of different entities within a state, namely, the executive, the legislature and the judiciary....
, judicially-restrained jurists go to great lengths to defer to the legislature. Judicial restraint requires the judge to uphold a law whenever possible. Former Associate Justice Felix Frankfurter
Felix Frankfurter
Felix Frankfurter was an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court.-Early life:Frankfurter was born into a Jewish family on November 15, 1882, in Vienna, Austria, then part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire in Europe. He was the third of six children of Leopold and Emma Frankfurter...
, a Democrat appointed by Franklin Roosevelt, is generally seen as the "model of judicial restraint".
Judicially-restrained judges respect stare decisis
Stare decisis
Stare decisis is a legal principle by which judges are obliged to respect the precedents established by prior decisions...
, the principle of upholding established precedent handed down by past judges. When the late Chief Justice Rehnquist
William Rehnquist
William Hubbs Rehnquist was an American lawyer, jurist, and political figure who served as an Associate Justice on the Supreme Court of the United States and later as the 16th Chief Justice of the United States...
overturned some of the precedents of the Warren Court, Time magazine said he was not following the theory of judicial restraint.
Minimalism
Judicial minimalistsMinimalism (judicial)
Judicial minimalism refers to a philosophy in United States constitutional law which promotes itself as a politically moderate viewpoint.-Summary and complaints against "judicial extremism":Largely associated with Cass R...
argue that judges should put great emphasis on adherence to stare decisis
Stare decisis
Stare decisis is a legal principle by which judges are obliged to respect the precedents established by prior decisions...
and precedent
Precedent
In common law legal systems, a precedent or authority is a principle or rule established in a legal case that a court or other judicial body may apply when deciding subsequent cases with similar issues or facts...
. Minimalists argue that judges should make only minor, incremental changes to constitutional law in order to maintain that stability. They ask judges to do this by creating small, case-specific rulings rather than broad, sweeping rulings.
Political question doctrine
The political questionPolitical question
In American Constitutional law, the political question doctrine is closely linked to the concept of justiciability, as it comes down to a question of whether or not the court system is an appropriate forum in which to hear the case. This is because the court system only has authority to hear and...
doctrine encourages courts to decline to rule in certain categories of controversial cases. Under this theory, a court acknowledges that the Constitution might have been violated but declines to act. It is often described as a type of judicial restraint, although it can be considered a form of judicial activism against plaintiffs whose rights have been violated and find their cases dismissed.
Judicial restraint and individual U.S. Supreme Court cases
- Luther v. BordenLuther v. BordenLuther v. Borden, 48 U.S. 1 , was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States established the political question doctrine in controversies arising under the Guarantee Clause of Article Four of the United States Constitution Luther v. Borden, 48 U.S. 1 (1849), was a case in which the...
, 1849 - sometimes called the first instance of judicial restraint - "Lyng v. Northwest Indian Cemetery Protective AssociationLyng v. Northwest Indian Cemetery Protective AssociationLyng v. Northwest Indian Cemetery Protective Association, 485 U.S. 439 , was a United States Supreme Court case. In 1982 The United States Forest Service prepared a final environmental impact statement for building a paved road through the Chimney Rock Area of the Six Rivers National Forest...
", 1988 - declared "A fundamental and longstanding principle of judicial restraint requires that courts avoid reaching constitutional questions in advance of the necessity of deciding them." - Bush v. GoreBush v. GoreBush v. Gore, , is the landmark United States Supreme Court decision on December 12, 2000, that effectively resolved the 2000 presidential election in favor of George W. Bush. Only eight days earlier, the United States Supreme Court had unanimously decided the closely related case of Bush v...
, 2000 - Florida Supreme Court's method for recounting ballots was ruled as having violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment in a presidential election - District of Columbia v. HellerDistrict of Columbia v. HellerDistrict of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 , was a landmark case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects an individual's right to possess a firearm for traditionally lawful purposes in federal enclaves, such as...
, 2008 - Declared the Washington, D.C. ban on private ownership of hand guns unconstitutional in violation of the 2nd AmendmentSecond Amendment to the United States ConstitutionThe Second Amendment to the United States Constitution is the part of the United States Bill of Rights that protects the right of the people to keep and bear arms. It was adopted on December 15, 1791, along with the rest of the Bill of Rights.In 2008 and 2010, the Supreme Court issued two Second...