Protecting The Role of the Judiciary

Student’s Name Professor’s Name Course Number Date Protecting the Role of the Judiciary Introduction Governments rule their people using a set of rules and regulations that determine individual behaviors and punishments for misbehaviors. The judiciary is entrusted to ensure that the laws of the land are upheld and offenders face the wrath of the law. However, the role of the judiciary has been contested for a long time. Some people point out that judges are key figures in adhering to the Constitution. Other people point out that judges are abusing the power bestowed to them in order to legislate on the bench. This paper discusses what constitutes the appropriate role of the judiciary, concerns on judicial power, judicial restraint, and the role of judicial activism. The Appropriate Role of the Judiciary The appropriate role of the judiciary is to uphold the Constitution and the rule of law. This means that the judiciary is entrusted with the task of ensuring that legislative and executive actions remain within constitutional boundaries. Conflicts may arise between one citizen and another citizen or a group of citizens. Similarly, government agencies and non-governmental organizations may be involved in conflicts with each other. The judiciary is expected to operate as an impartial arbiter in resolving disputes (California Courts 1-2). It should interpret laws and protect individual rights. Foreign investors and refugees should feel welcomed in a new country. Through the consistent application of laws, the judiciary provides stability and clarity within the legal framework. Upholding the Constitution and maintaining law and order is a process that is continuously subjected to changes. New loopholes that manipulators can use should be identified and addressed. At the same time, gaps in justice delivery should also be assessed and bridged. The judiciary of any country is tasked with overseeing this process. As the judiciary performs these roles, it should retain its independence from either party. Landmark decisions, such as Brown v. Board of Education, illustrate how the judiciary can effectuate profound societal changes while upholding constitutional principles (National Archives). Judges should make independent decisions based on legal reasoning that is free from external pressures. Moreover, the judiciary is expected to adapt to modern challenges (Levendusky et al. 2). For example, there were a few cases of cyber cries in the 20th century, and the laws against cyber terrorism were not as advanced. In the 21st century, technology has become part of daily life, and many people have embraced technological solutions. This means that there are more data breaches and unauthorized access. The judiciary should be equipped with updated laws that successfully curb new threats in the justice system. The judiciary’s ability to balance independence, accountability, and adaptability ensures it remains a cornerstone of democracy. Judicial Activism and Concerns About Judicial Power The concept of judicial activism refers to the tendency of courts to interpret laws and the Constitution in a way that influences or shapes public policy. A judge may go beyond the original intent of the framers of the Constitution in order to support a certain cause. Judicial activism has received support and critic...