A) judicial activism INCORRECT Judicial activism refers to a judicial philosophy where judges are more willing to interpret the Constitution and laws in a way that reflects contemporary values and social needs, often striking down laws or policies that they believe are unjust. While judicial activism can involve the use of judicial review, it is not the principle itself. The passage likely refers to the general power of courts to review laws, not a specific philosophy of judging. Judicial activism is often criticized by those who believe judges should not legislate from the bench, but it is not the same as the power of judicial review.
B) judicial restraint INCORRECT Judicial restraint is a philosophy that encourages judges to limit the exercise of their own power, deferring to the decisions of the legislative and executive branches unless a law is clearly unconstitutional. This philosophy emphasizes the importance of respecting precedent and the original intent of the Constitution. While judicial restraint may influence how judges apply judicial review, it is not the principle itself. The passage likely describes the power of courts to declare laws unconstitutional, which is judicial review, not a philosophy of restraint.
C) judicial review CORRECT Judicial review is the power of the courts to examine laws and government actions to determine whether they violate the Constitution. This principle was established in Marbury v. Madison (1803) and is a fundamental aspect of the American system of checks and balances. It allows the judiciary to invalidate laws that are unconstitutional, ensuring that the Constitution remains the supreme law of the land. The passage likely refers to this power, making it the correct answer.
D) judicial supremacy INCORRECT Judicial supremacy is the idea that the Supreme Court has the final authority on constitutional interpretation, and that its decisions are binding on all other branches of government. While judicial review is a key component of judicial supremacy, the two concepts are distinct. Judicial supremacy refers to the hierarchical position of the Supreme Court in constitutional matters, whereas judicial review is the specific power to declare laws unconstitutional. The passage likely focuses on the power itself, not the hierarchical authority, making judicial review the more precise answer.
