Judicial activism involves actively reviewing and potentially overturning decisions by other branches of government to protect individual rights. Judicial restraint, on the other hand, suggests judges should defer decisions to elected branches and focus on a narrow interpretation of the law.
Judicial activism is a judicial philosophy where judges actively review and potentially overturn decisions or actions by other branches of government, aiming to protect individual rights and liberties. This approach involves judges taking a vigorous or active role in interpreting the Constitution. In contrast, judicial restraint advocates for judges to defer decisions to elected branches and focus on a narrower interpretation of the law.
https://brainly.com/question/29545866
