The Dangers and Benefits of Judicial Activism

How Conservatives View Activist Judges

In many conservative circles the word “activist judge” has come to known as a curse word. Conservatives see “activist judges” as destroying many of the core tenants of American culture by: permitting abortion, allowing for the marriage of homosexual and transgendered people, and removing religious aspects from public life. Some conservatives have even gone so far to suggest that “activist judges” be arrested.

I would like to argue that not all judicial activism is bad, and in many cases it can be of great benefit to society. Without judicial activism America would be a very different place than it is now. Thanks in large part to what would now be known as “judicial activism” there is greater equality among American people, at least in terms of race. The ruling in Brown v. Board of Education led to the integration of public schools, which was very unpopular at the time. 

The Victory of Brown v. Board of Education

However, there have also been cases where judicial activism has been used to restrict the rights of the people or to undermine the core democratic values of America. In Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission the Supreme Court ruled that corporations can be treated as people, and therefore can donate unlimited amounts of money to shady Super Political Action Committees that are not “officially” tied to a candidate. This means that the wealthy can essentially buy an American election through almost unlimited resources. The candidates elected by these shadowy Super PACs will also be more likely to support bills that would benefit the interests of the Super PAC and the corporation behind them.

The Dangers of the Citizens United Case

I personally believe that judicial activism can be great for this country, as in Brown v. Board of Education. But there are also great dangers in Judicial Activism, such as in the Citizens United case. I believe that judicial activism should be used to increase equality in America and not be used to support the interests of the wealthy and powerful.