Judicial restraint is the political theory that says courts shouldn't, unless absolutely required, issue rulings that broaden or alter the character of existing laws.
<h3>Justiciable constraint is exercised by whom?</h3>
A jurist (judge or justice) who upholds a philosophy of restraint can be described as one who considers democracy to have intrinsic, rather than just instrumental, value, that the judiciary is indeed the least powerful of the three branches of government, and who values stability and predictability in the lawmaking process.
<h3>Why do advocates of judicial restraint assert that judges are impervious to public sentiment?</h3>
They are freed from the strain of the outer world of public opinion since they do not have to worry about being reelected. In the end, the majority may not always be correct. The fact that the Founders established appointed judges and elected legislators is not by coincidence.
Learn more about Judicial restraint: brainly.com/question/29545866
#SPJ4
The Fourteenth Amendment prevents states from denying citizens equal protection of the laws.
<h3>
What is the Fourteenth Amendment?</h3>
- The Fourteenth Amendment (Amendment XIV) to the United States Constitution was ratified as one of the Reconstruction Amendments on July 9, 1868.
- It was proposed in response to issues concerning former slaves following the American Civil War and is widely regarded as one of the most consequential amendments.
- It addresses citizenship rights and equal protection under the law.
- The amendment was fiercely contested, especially by the defeated Confederacy's states, which were forced to ratify it in order to regain representation in Congress.
- The first section of the amendment, in particular, is one of the most litigated parts of the Constitution, serving as the foundation for landmark Supreme Court decisions such as Brown v. Board of Education (1954) regarding racial segregation, Roe v. Wade (1973) regarding abortion (overturned in 2022), Bush v. Gore (2000) regarding the 2000 presidential election, and Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) regarding same-sex marriage.
- The amendment restricts the actions of all state and local officials, as well as those acting on their behalf.
Therefore, the Fourteenth Amendment prevents states from denying citizens equal protection of the laws.
Know more about the Fourteenth Amendment here:
brainly.com/question/891756
#SPJ4
What is Katz argument: The Court ruled that Katz was entitled to Fourth Amendment protection for his conversations and that a physical intrusion into the area he occupied was unnecessary to bring the Amendment into play. "The Fourth Amendment protects people, not places," wrote Justice Potter Stewart for the Court.
What is the Katz v United States holding: The Court ruled that Katz was entitled to Fourth Amendment protection for his conversations and that a physical intrusion into the area he occupied was unnecessary to bring the Amendment into play. "The Fourth Amendment protects people, not places," wrote Justice Potter Stewart for the Court.
This is more of a personal preference but here’s what I think: I think the first amendment is the most important because that is 1 large point of freedom that everybody uses daily. The freedom of speech allows us to state our ideas, protect ourselves, get things done, make us individuals and unique, and a lot more. If we didn’t have our first amendment then the rest of the amendments wouldn’t be used to its full effect at all.
