The Judicial Branch and the Rise of Judicial Activism
This quiz will test your knowledge about the Judicial Branch and the Rise of Judicial Activism.
Questions
What is the primary role of the Judicial Branch?
- To interpret and apply the law
- To make laws
- To enforce laws
- To oversee the executive branch
What is judicial activism?
- A philosophy that judges should interpret the law strictly according to its original meaning
- A philosophy that judges should interpret the law broadly to promote social justice
- A philosophy that judges should defer to the decisions of the other branches of government
- A philosophy that judges should use their own personal beliefs to decide cases
Which Supreme Court case is often cited as the beginning of the era of judicial activism?
- Marbury v. Madison
- Brown v. Board of Education
- Roe v. Wade
- Obergefell v. Hodges
What is the doctrine of stare decisis?
- The doctrine that judges should follow the decisions of previous courts
- The doctrine that judges should interpret the law strictly according to its original meaning
- The doctrine that judges should defer to the decisions of the other branches of government
- The doctrine that judges should use their own personal beliefs to decide cases
Which Supreme Court justice is known for his strong support of judicial activism?
- Earl Warren
- William Brennan
- Thurgood Marshall
- Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Which Supreme Court justice is known for his strong opposition to judicial activism?
- Antonin Scalia
- Clarence Thomas
- Samuel Alito
- Neil Gorsuch
What is the difference between judicial activism and judicial restraint?
- Judicial activism is a philosophy that judges should interpret the law broadly to promote social justice, while judicial restraint is a philosophy that judges should interpret the law strictly according to its original meaning.
- Judicial activism is a philosophy that judges should defer to the decisions of the other branches of government, while judicial restraint is a philosophy that judges should use their own personal beliefs to decide cases.
- Judicial activism is a philosophy that judges should follow the decisions of previous courts, while judicial restraint is a philosophy that judges should overturn the decisions of previous courts.
- Judicial activism is a philosophy that judges should make laws, while judicial restraint is a philosophy that judges should enforce laws.
What are some of the arguments in favor of judicial activism?
- It allows judges to protect the rights of minorities and other vulnerable groups.
- It allows judges to keep up with the changing needs of society.
- It allows judges to promote social justice.
- All of the above.
What are some of the arguments against judicial activism?
- It allows judges to impose their own personal beliefs on society.
- It undermines the authority of the other branches of government.
- It can lead to unpredictable and inconsistent rulings.
- All of the above.
Do you think judicial activism is a good thing or a bad thing?
- Good
- Bad
- It depends
What are some recent examples of judicial activism?
- The Supreme Court's decision to legalize same-sex marriage
- The Supreme Court's decision to strike down the Defense of Marriage Act
- The Supreme Court's decision to uphold the Affordable Care Act
- All of the above
What are some recent examples of judicial restraint?
- The Supreme Court's decision to uphold the death penalty
- The Supreme Court's decision to strike down the Voting Rights Act
- The Supreme Court's decision to uphold the Second Amendment right to bear arms
- All of the above
Do you think the Supreme Court should be more activist or more restrained?
- More activist
- More restrained
- It depends
What are some of the challenges facing the Judicial Branch today?
- The increasing politicization of the courts
- The growing backlog of cases
- The lack of diversity among judges
- All of the above
What can be done to address these challenges?
- Appoint more judges
- Increase funding for the courts
- Reform the judicial selection process
- All of the above