Question

what is the contrast between judicial restraint and judicial activism in the supreme court? (1 point) judicial restraint means the court does not get involved; judicial activism means the court reviews the action. judicial restraint means the court takes ownership of the issues; judicial activism means the court has a lot of power. judicial restraint means the court reviews the action; judicial activism means the court does not get involved. judicial restraint means the court does not include its own preferences; judicial activism means the court is silent on the issues of the branches.

Explanation:

Judicial restraint is when the court interprets laws narrowly and avoids inserting its own preferences, respecting the legislature's intent. Judicial activism is when the court is more willing to interpret the Constitution broadly and make decisions that may go beyond strict legal - text, often to address perceived social or political issues. The correct contrast is that judicial restraint means the court does not include its own preferences, while judicial activism implies a more interventionist stance.

Answer:

None of the provided options are correct. The correct understanding is that judicial restraint means the court does not include its own preferences; judicial activism means the court is more willing to use its power to make decisions that may involve its own interpretations to address issues.