Judicial activism

Legal activism (English judicial activism ) refers to the willingness of a court to set new guidelines. This activism is most evident in the creation of new guidelines on the interpretation of the law. The term judicial activism was by Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. ( 1947) coined, although the underlying concept is part of the legal criticism since the beginning of the 19th century. The opposite is the legal self-restraint ( judicial restraint ).

The term is especially used by the Republicans in the political debate in the United States to reject political interference in the case law through broad interpretation of constitutional requirements. Conservative criticism is directed against decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States. After the Democrats consider legal activism is, however, necessary to protect minorities against an irrational and discriminatory majority morality.

The Western European Justice was politicized, according to Wolfgang Ismayr since the 1980s, increasingly through judicial activism. An indicator of judicial activism is the increase judicial review of government action ( judicial review) and non- parliamentary committees of inquiry chaired by a senior judge ( judicial inquiries ). In India, the legal activism has increased since the 1980s.