The way to achieve this impartiality – to free judges to decide cases based on what the law actually requires, and on nothing else – is to ensure that the judiciary is independent, or, put differently, not subject to reprisals for decisions on the bench.
But judicial independence is not an absolute or singular value defining our courts. The principle of judicial restraint is equally important – and it is inextricably linked to judicial independence. At one level, the tension between the two seems inescapable. But there is an important sense in which an independent judiciary and judicial restraint are flip sides of the same coin. Both aim to minimize the influence of extraneous factors on judicial decision-making. A judge must not decide a case with an eye toward public approbation, because whether a particular result is popular is irrelevant to whether it is legally sound. In the same way, a judge must not consult
Answer:
Early Tamil-Siva bhakti poets influenced Hindu texts that came to be revered all over India. ... In turn it influenced devotional practices in Islam such as Sufism, and other religions in India from 15th century onwards, such as Sikhism, Christianity, and Jainism.
Roosevelt said that he wanted to increase the number of judges on the Supreme Court because he was facing a judicial pushback on many of his New Deal policies, and wanted to appoint judges who would likely be in favor of his policies.
Answer:scholar-bureaucrats at the top, because they had the knowledge and wisdom to maintain social order;
Explanation:
