Which judicial philosophy believes judges should make bold policy decisions to meet societal needs?

• A. Judicial Restraint
• B. Strict Constructionism
• C. Judicial Activism
• D. Originalism

Answer: (C)

The idea being tested is how courts view their role in making public policy. Judicial activism is the philosophy that judges should take an active, sometimes bold, role in policy-making to respond to societal needs. Proponents argue that when legislatures fail to address urgent issues or protect rights, the judiciary can step in and use broad interpretations of the Constitution or statutes to implement reforms and extend protections. This approach embraces flexible readings and is willing to expand rights or overturn laws to solve pressing social problems. By contrast, other views emphasize limiting the judiciary’s power and sticking to the text or original meaning of the Constitution, rather than crafting policy. So, describing bold policy decisions by judges to meet societal needs best fits judicial activism.