Listen. The philosophy proposing that judges should interpret the Constitution to reflect what the framers intended and what its words literally say is:
A. precedent
B. judicial restraint
C. judicial activism
D. original jurisdiction
Answer (2)
Judicial restraint is the philosophy where judges interpret the Constitution based on the framers' intent and the literal text. In contrast to judicial activism, which allows for broader interpretations, judicial restraint focuses on strict adherence to constitutional language. Understanding these distinctions is crucial for analyzing how judicial decisions are made. ;
The correct answer is B. judicial restraint , which represents the philosophy of interpreting the Constitution based on its original intent and literal wording. This approach emphasizes limiting judicial power and adhering to the original text. In contrast, judicial activism allows for broader interpretations based on modern values.
;
