1066:. This was rejected by the Divisional Court and attracted large amounts of media attention to this case. Through these components it is largely evident that judicial activism should not be exaggerated. Ultimately, judicial activism is greatly established throughout the UK as the courts are becoming more prone to scrutinise at their own will, and at times, reject government legislation that they deem to be not within balance to the UK constitution and becoming more visible doing so.
879:
978:
593:
278:, i.e., there should be an increase in the powers of a branch of government that is not directly subject to the electorate, so that the majority cannot dominate or oppress any particular minority through its elective powers. Other scholars have proposed that judicial activism is most appropriate when it restrains the tendency of democratic majorities to act out of passion and prejudice rather than after reasoned deliberation.
104:
1039:, previously known as Crown privilege. Previously, a claim like this would be defined as definitive, but the judges had slowly begun to adopt more of an activist line approach. This had become more prominent in which government actions were overturned by the courts. This can inevitably lead to clashes between the courts against the government as shown in the
547:
the charge of judicial activism may be understood as saying that judges are pursuing a particular political agenda, that they are allowing their political views to determine the outcome of cases before them. ... It is a serious matter to suggest that any branch of government is deliberately acting in
74:
The phrase has been controversial since its beginning. An article by Craig Green, "An
Intellectual History of Judicial Activism," is critical of Schlesinger's use of the term; "Schlesinger's original introduction of judicial activism was doubly blurred: not only did he fail to explain what counts as
1053:
the
Parliament of the United Kingdom. This can be seen throughout the 1980s, where there were about 500 applications within a year. This number dramatically increased as by 2013, there were 15,594 applications. This trend has become more frequent as time passes along, possibly pointing to a greater
754:
India's judges have sweeping powers and a long history of judicial activism that would be all but unimaginable in the United States. In recent years, judges required Delhi's auto-rickshaws to convert to natural gas to help cut down on pollution, closed much of the country's iron-ore-mining industry
184:
has argued that "in practice 'activist' turns out to be little more than a rhetorically charged shorthand for decisions the speaker disagrees with". Roosevelt defines judicial activism as "an approach to the exercise of judicial review, or a description of a particular judicial decision, in which a
249:
will necessarily be shaped by that judge's personal and professional experience and his or her views on a wide range of matters, from legal and juridical philosophy to morals and ethics. This implies a tension between granting flexibility (to enable the dispensing of justice) and placing bounds on
284:
quotes
Justice Holmes "great cases... make bad law." in their explanation on presidential overreach. "Presidents frequently interpret their own powers without judicial review and where executive precedents play a large role in subsequent interpretive debates, some of the historical assertions of
755:
to cut down on corruption and ruled that politicians facing criminal charges could not seek re-election. Indeed, India's
Supreme Court and Parliament have openly battled for decades, with Parliament passing multiple constitutional amendments to respond to various Supreme Court rulings.
169:
Political science professor
Bradley Canon has posited six dimensions along which judge courts may be perceived as activist: majoritarianism, interpretive stability, interpretive fidelity, substance/democratic process, specificity of policy, and availability of an alternate policymaker.
534:
have a structure that relies more heavily on the discretion of its judges, policy and common law to create a workable body of law. Thus Canada's legal system may have more potential for conflicts with regards to the accusation of judicial activism, as compared to the United States.
244:
According to law professor Brian Z. Tamanaha, "Throughout the so-called formalist age, it turns out, many prominent judges and jurists acknowledged that there were gaps and uncertainties in the law and that judges must sometimes make choices." Under this view, any judge's use of
1018:, and, as of 2022, presents an especially broad version of robust judicial review and intervention. Additionally, taking into consideration the intensity of public life in Israel and the challenges that the country faces (including security threats), the case law of the
1030:
British courts were largely deferential towards their attitudes against the government before the 1960s. Since then, judicial activism has been well established throughout the UK. One of the first cases for this activism to be present was the
919:, is a useful starting point for translations, but translators must revise errors as necessary and confirm that the translation is accurate, rather than simply copy-pasting machine-translated text into the English Knowledge (XXG).
1045:
444:
780:
arguing in the
Constituent Assembly Debates that "judicial review, particularly writ jurisdiction, could provide quick relief against abridgment of Fundamental Rights and ought to be at the heart of the Constitution."
259:
Sentiments include: "The courts have gradually abandoned their proper role of policing the structural limits on government and neutrally interpreting the laws and constitutional provisions without personal bias."
2457:
1073:
raises the popular concern that this system operates on a fundamentally different playbook to the United States of
America's court of law, and personal bias can be inherited, through an 'old boys' club'.
1564:(University of Chicago Press, 2000), p. 98. ("Possibly some now-obscure German legal theorist fit Holmes's description of the deductive formalist bogeyman, but I know of no American who did.")
1069:
Obviously since the United
Kingdom's judiciary powers do not come from electoral methods, they differ in strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats compared to a free and democratic system.
434:– a 2018 Supreme Court decision addressing whether unions can require dues from all workers who benefit from collective bargaining agreements. The decision overturned the 41-year-old precedent of
303:
Detractors of judicial activism charge that it usurps the power of the elected branches of government and of legislatively created agencies, damaging the rule of law and democracy. Advocates of
519:, a strong tradition in Canada and accepted practice, judges should respect the role of the legislature to create law. Judges are also charged to impartially apply the law as it is written.
1054:
influence in the UK courts against the government. Along with the number of applications submitted to the courts, in some instances it has attracted media attention. For instance, in 1993,
33:
is a judicial philosophy holding that courts can and should go beyond the applicable law to consider broader societal implications of their decisions. It is sometimes used as an antonym of
2512:"Barak-Erez, Daphne --- "Broadening the Scope of Judicial Review in Israel: Between Activism and Restraint" [2009] INJlConLaw 8; (2009) 3 Indian Journal of Constitutional Law 118"
1043:
case consisting of the 2016 Conservative government. The perceptions of judicial activism derived from the number of applications for judicial review made to the courts, which led to
274:
Some proponents of a stronger judiciary argue that the judiciary helps provide checks and balances and should grant itself an expanded role to counterbalance the effects of transient
661:
are negotiated, it is difficult to get all governments to agree on a clear set of laws. In order to get a compromise, governments agree to leave a decision on an issue to the Court.
166:
defines judicial activism as a "philosophy of judicial decision-making whereby judges allow their personal views about public policy, among other factors, to guide their decisions."
424:
1265:
Schlesinger's article profiled all nine
Supreme Court justices on the Court at that time and explained the alliances and divisions among them. The article characterized Justices
1135:
396:
41:. The definition of judicial activism and the specific decisions that are activist are controversial political issues. The question of judicial activism is closely related to
2341:
2813:
114:
173:
David A. Strauss has argued that judicial activism can be narrowly defined as one or more of three possible actions: overturning laws as unconstitutional, overturning
2467:
1947:
1484:
2795:
464:
1062:(a legislation that self described as "a new stage in the process of European integration"), which eventually had formed into the European Union and initiated the
1806:
403:
580:
in Quebec was deemed by many as a prominent example of judicial activism. The judgment was written by
Justice Deschamps with a tight majority of 4 against 3.
891:
345:
1830:
480:
Every judge I appoint will be a person who clearly understands the role of a judge is to interpret the law, not to legislate from the bench. To paraphrase
1442:
550:
2777:
1160:
507:
Judges in Canada are given the power to interpret law passed down from the legislature, discretionary power to resolve disputes, and the power to use
922:
Do not translate text that appears unreliable or low-quality. If possible, verify the text with references provided in the foreign-language article.
384:
2241:
930:
831:
has heard important cases regarding the use of this doctrine in their own countries. The modern trend of judicial activism began in 1973 when the
624:
556:
1775:
1070:
800:
453:
285:
presidential authority that stretch constitutional and statutory language the furthest seem hard to condemn in light of the practical stakes."
186:
185:
judge is generally considered more willing to decide constitutional issues and to invalidate legislative or executive actions."; likewise, the
2396:
2051:
2964:
2895:
1755:
1545:
1428:
683:
2489:
2320:
841:
769:
220:
2555:
846:
707:
436:
468:- a 2022 Supreme Court ruling reversing the effects of Roe v. Wade, allowing states once again to forbid abortion within their borders.
3031:
2683:
2174:
1998:
380:
3039:
3018:
2997:
2867:
2842:
2743:
2615:
2295:
2162:
1613:
1586:
1472:
1420:
1191:
485:
148:
2657:
2439:
1574:
Price, David Andrew. "Taking rights cynically: a review of critical legal studies." The Cambridge Law Journal 48.2 (1989): 271-301.
710:
to make written guarantees that the EU will under no circumstances interfere with Irish abortion, taxation or military neutrality.
576:
1 R.C.S. which declared unconstitutional the prohibition of private healthcare insurance, and challenged the principle of Canadian
1376:
2345:
1729:
559:. Specifically, rulings that have favoured the extension of gay rights, have prompted accusations of judicial activism. Justice
765:
2268:
2367:
2192:
492:) the courts exist to exercise not the will of men, but the judgment of law. My judicial nominees will know the difference.
3080:
943:
Content in this edit is translated from the existing Hebrew Knowledge (XXG) article at ]; see its history for attribution.
180:
Others have been less confident of the term's meaning, finding it instead to be little more than a rhetorical shorthand.
1155:
1130:
1009:
489:
408:
1803:
207:, that "most people use the term 'judicial activism' to explain decisions that they don't like." Supreme Court Justice
3060:
2024:
1767:
Vincent Martin Bonventre, "Judicial activism, judges' speech, and merit selection: conventional wisdom and nonsense,"
784:
502:
355:
130:
664:
The Court can only practice judicial activism to the extent the EU Governments leave room for interpretation in the
3075:
3055:
2425:
Where did the revolution go? The Supreme Court of India & Socio-economic rights since the end of Emergency Rule
1377:"David Strauss Looks at History and Future of the "Activist" Supreme Court | University of Chicago Law School"
745:
cognizance allows the courts to take up such cases on its own. The trend has been supported as well as criticized.
734:
1913:
764:, although before and during the Emergency the judiciary desisted from "wide and elastic" interpretations, termed
3070:
3065:
1861:
1838:
695:
634:
316:
315:, while maximalist definitions of democracy, include additional values typically enshrined in the constitutions.
162:
2904:
Ginsberg, Benjamin, et al. We the People: an Introduction to American Politics. W.W. Norton & Company, 2017.
1181:
637:
ruled the German laws prohibiting sales of liquors with alcohol percentages between 15% and 25% conflicted with
2087:
1108:
1036:
938:
792:
46:
959:
2908:
Moravcsik, A. (2002). "In defense of the democratic deficit: reassessing legitimacy in the European Union".
1114:
1019:
564:
234:
204:
42:
787:
as enshrined in the Constitution have been subjected to wide review, and have now been said to encompass a
3007:
Governing With the Charter: Legislative And Judicial Activism And Framer's Intent (Law and Society Series)
2069:
1093:'s Judicial Power Project, headed by Ekins, is dedicated to opposing judicial activism by British judges.
952:
531:
312:
298:
253:
126:
61:
2989:
1973:
1834:
1499:"Review Procedures And Public Accountability In Sunset Legislation: An Analysis And Proposal For Reform"
1278:
1236:
761:
731:
727:
577:
281:
269:
2490:"Beijing like Delhi, goes the CNG way!! - Investment News and Commentary from Emerging Markets in Asia"
2105:
1014:
The Israeli approach to judicial activism has transformed significantly in the three decades since the
448:– a 2020 Supreme Court decision addressing whether the Department of Homeland Security under President
650:
2981:
2582:"Conway v Rimmer | [1968] AC 910 | United Kingdom House of Lords | Judgment | Law | CaseMine"
1772:
1339:
As quoted in "Takings Clause Jurisprudence: Muddled, Perhaps; Judicial Activism, No" DF O'Scannlain,
832:
796:
630:
516:
415:
181:
50:
1049:
in 2019, joint landmark constitutional law cases on the limits of the power of royal prerogative to
3023:
2400:
1294:
1140:
854:
246:
1354:
2970:
2946:
2925:
2581:
2556:"Israeli Supreme Court decisions search - Israeli Lawyers | Israeli Law Firm Golan & Co"
2462:
2301:
2223:
2163:
http://www.europeanvoice.com/article/2008/12/irish-secure-concessions-on-lisbon-treaty/63409.aspx
1518:
1290:
1270:
1256:
850:
539:
420:
320:
65:
34:
2242:"Opinion | Rana Ayyub: The destruction of India's judicial independence is almost complete"
1465:
The context of judicial activism: the endurance of the Warren Court legacy in a conservative age
526:
that is derived from the British system of common law (and the French system in the province of
1887:"Symposium: Judicial activism on marriage causes harm: What does the future hold? - SCOTUSblog"
1223:
It is not pejorative, and studies suggest that it does not have a consistent political valence.
3085:
3035:
3014:
2993:
2960:
2891:
2863:
2838:
2739:
2709:
2611:
2559:
2511:
2291:
1921:
1751:
1711:
1629:
1609:
1541:
1510:
1468:
1424:
1416:
1326:
1312:
1286:
1282:
1187:
1150:
1120:
1059:
1055:
934:
572:
328:
304:
238:
1886:
2952:
2917:
2877:
1703:
1450:
1248:
788:
703:
250:
that flexibility (to hold judges to ruling from legal grounds rather than extralegal ones).
83:
79:
37:. The term usually implies that judges make rulings based on their own views rather than on
2759:
737:
was thus an instrument devised by the courts to reach out directly to the public, and take
1810:
1779:
1090:
773:
738:
430:
419:– 2015 Supreme Court decision declaring same-sex marriage as a right guaranteed under the
275:
230:
224:
208:
199:
78:
Even before this phrase was first used, the general concept already existed. For example,
17:
1678:
1773:
Judicial activism, judges' speech, and merit selection: conventional wisdom and nonsense
3002:
2305:
2283:
1914:"Opinion | The Consequences of Judicial Activism on the Supreme Court (Published 2018)"
1826:
1673:
1668:
1298:
672:
560:
473:
388:
308:
294:
194:
190:
977:
592:
3049:
2974:
2929:
1395:"judicial activism | Definition, Types, Examples, & Facts | Britannica"
1394:
1207:
1078:
858:
836:
816:
715:
699:
691:
676:
657:
are unclear, they leave room for the Court to interpret them in different ways. When
523:
481:
360:
87:
1646:
2052:"Conservatives love judicial activism – as long as the law is moved in their favor"
1831:"Commentary: Citizens United vs. FEC is an egregious exercise of judicial activism"
1274:
1086:
1015:
777:
457:
449:
375:
2881:
2371:
229:
Defenders of judicial activism say that in many cases it is a legitimate form of
2887:
2631:
1145:
1082:
658:
367:
256:
argues that political argument and legal argument cannot be entirely separated.
211:
said that, "An activist court is a court that makes a decision you don't like."
1974:"The Supreme Court's Janus ruling was pure judicial activism. Unions, look out"
1707:
407:– 2010 Supreme Court decision declaring congressionally enacted limitations on
2956:
1266:
1103:
1063:
804:
742:
508:
1925:
1715:
1514:
1327:"The Role of the Supreme Court in American Government and Politics 1789-1835"
371:– 1973 Supreme Court ruling creating the constitutional right to an abortion.
3010:
2921:
1573:
1125:
820:
512:
324:
38:
1208:"judicial activism | Definition, Types, Examples, & Facts | Britannica"
865:
problem (it is now argued to be back) and contrasted with that of Beijing.
1948:"A Supreme Court ruling for Janus would be judicial activism at its worst"
1046:
R (Miller) v The Prime Minister and Cherry v Advocate General for Scotland
646:
445:
Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California
3028:
Against Judicial Activism: The Decline of Freedom And Democracy in Canada
1694:
Feldman, David (1990). "Democracy, the Rule of Law and Judicial Review".
1628:
Evan Zoldan, "Targeted Judicial Activism," 16 Green Bag 2d 465-66 (2014)
1050:
812:
808:
799:
not to be alterable, notwithstanding the powers of the Legislature under
687:
665:
654:
174:
1522:
853:
further expanded its scope. Recent examples quoted include the order to
718:
a second time in 2009, with a 67.13% majority voting Yes to the treaty.
2948:
Judicial Activism and the Democratic Rule of Law: Selected Case Studies
2227:
1498:
1260:
941:
to the source of your translation. A model attribution edit summary is
711:
638:
484:(hailed as the Father of the Constitution for his role in drafting the
392:
2986:
The Myth of Judicial Activism: Making Sense of Supreme Court Decisions
2529:
2211:
1413:
The Myth of Judicial Activism: Making Sense of Supreme Court Decisions
563:
is a particularly common target of those who perceive activism on the
2778:"Lady Hale warns UK not to select judges on basis of political views"
828:
824:
642:
527:
177:, and ruling against a preferred interpretation of the constitution.
2428:(Masters thesis). University of Oxford – via www.academia.edu.
2193:"judicial Supremacy v. Parliamentary Supremacy in India – Lloyd Law"
1633:
1538:
Beyond the Formalist-Realist Divide: The Role of Politics in Judging
1252:
772:
are non-justiciable. This despite the constitutional provisions for
698:
to make activist rulings in these areas. After the rejection of the
350:
The following rulings have been characterized as judicial activism.
75:
activism, he also declined to say whether activism is good or bad."
2423:
2269:"Indian Judiciary - inducing activism or leading towards overreach"
726:
India has a recent history of judicial activism, originating after
476:
announced his first nominations for the federal bench, he declared:
472:
Some US Presidents have also commented on the idea. When President
1443:"Ted Olson on Debate Over Judicial Activism and Same-Sex Marriage"
671:
The Court makes important rulings that set the agenda for further
555:
Such accusations often arise in response to rulings involving the
2883:
Becoming Justice Blackmun: Harry Blackmun's Supreme Court Journey
411:
and transparency as unconstitutional restrictions on free speech.
1562:
Law Without Values: The Life, Work, and Legacy of Justice Holmes
916:
862:
861:
to CNG, a move believed to have reduced Delhi's erstwhile acute
791:, right to livelihood and right to education, among others. The
2123:
972:
872:
803:. This doctrine has been recognized by several countries like
587:
97:
1748:
Constitutions and Constitutionalism in the Slaveholding South
1077:
Among critics of judicial activism in the United Kingdom are
675:, but it cannot happen without the consensual support of the
113:
deal primarily with the United States and do not represent a
2684:"The true statistics behind judicial review's success rates"
2321:"India's Supreme Court Restores an 1861 Law Banning Gay Sex"
456:
program initiated by Executive Order under former President
2632:"Gina Miller: Who is campaigner behind Brexit court cases?"
548:
a manner that is inconsistent with its constitutional role.
2558:. Israeli Supreme Court Decisions database. Archived from
1329:. University of California Press – via Google Books.
205:
a case for same-sex marriage he had successfully litigated
64:
introduced the term "judicial activism" in a January 1947
2342:"Note on change over to CNG in transport sector in Delhi"
1058:
had challenged the Conservative government to ratify the
2145:
2143:
1487:," Associated Press, May 14, 2010, Retrieved 14 May 2010
1237:"The Origin and Current Meanings of 'Judicial Activism'"
690:
were included in the debate because of worries that the
686:
many issues not directly related to the treaty, such as
989:
760:
All such rulings carry the force of Article 39A of the
604:
241:
can limit the interpretation uncertainties in the law.
122:
2391:
2389:
1587:"How to Spot Judicial Activism: Three Recent Examples"
2710:"Lord Rees-Mogg Loses Challenge to Maastricht Treaty"
1608:. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. chapters 4–6.
1136:
List of landmark court decisions in the United States
1022:
touches on diverse and controversial public matters.
1862:"Citizens United and Conservative Judicial Activism"
1730:"Statutory Interpretation and Legislative Supremacy"
912:
538:
Former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada
482:
4th president of the United States James Madison Jr
2025:"Lewis Denounces DACA Ruling as Judicial Activism"
1016:1992 Constitutional Revolution led by Aharon Barak
2458:"Delhi enveloped in smog, back to pre-CNG levels"
2336:
2334:
2290:. University of Toronto Press. pp. 223–255.
1999:"Supreme Court Rules For DREAMers, Against Trump"
1441:Wallace, Chris; Olson, Theodore (8 August 2010).
1485:Justice questions way court nominees are grilled
2658:"Judicial review procedures to be made simpler"
2175:"Tyranny Of The Unelect Influencing Judiciary?"
752:
478:
383:case between the major-party candidates in the
2853:(2 ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2530:"The Tal Law: Judicial Activism at its Height"
1355:"Defining the Dimensions of Judicial Activism"
1313:"An Intellectual History of Judicial Activism"
1293:as the 'Champions of Self Restraint.' Justice
937:accompanying your translation by providing an
903:Click for important translation instructions.
890:expand this section with text translated from
404:Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission
795:of the Constitution has been mandated by the
399:and as a result Bush was chosen as president.
111:The examples and perspective in this article
8:
2738:. London: The Hamlyn Trust. pp. 48–52.
2610:. London: The Hamlyn Trust. pp. 48–49.
1681:Governor of Colorado, et al. v. Evans et al.
1186:. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
465:Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization
346:Criticism of the United States Supreme Court
237:of the law must change with changing times.
86:federal judges, in particular Chief Justice
2212:"An Economic Analysis of Judicial Activism"
2161:Irish secure concessions on Lisbon Treaty:
2134:
1750:(University of Georgia Press, 1989). p. 1.
741:though the litigant may not be the victim.
2446:, 6 August 2012 Retrieved 21 December 2019
1791:
706:received concessions from the rest of the
71:article titled "The Supreme Court: 1947".
2814:"The justice system and the constitution"
2456:Neha Lalchandani, TNN (3 November 2012).
2149:
1281:as the 'Judicial Activists' and Justices
1161:Unconstitutional constitutional amendment
359:– 1954 Supreme Court ruling ordering the
149:Learn how and when to remove this message
2440:"Disturbing trends in judicial activism"
1509:(4). American Bar Association: 393–413.
730:which saw attempts by the Government to
82:referred to the "despotic behaviour" of
1172:
749:writer Gardiner Harris sums this up as
625:Judicial activism in the European Union
557:Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
511:and accepted judicial policy to render
2282:Tewari, Manish; Saxena, Rekha (2017).
2210:Anant, T. C. A.; Jaivir Singh (2002).
454:Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals
2319:Harris, Gardiner (11 December 2013).
1912:Marvit, Moshe Z. (26 February 2018).
684:Irish referendum on the Lisbon Treaty
395:. The justices voted 5–4 to halt the
7:
2849:Bache, Ian; George, Stephen (2006).
2492:. 2point6billion.com. 27 August 2007
842:State of Uttar Pradesh v. Raj Narain
770:Directive Principles of State Policy
331:views the constitution as supreme.
221:Indeterminacy debate in legal theory
215:Indeterminacy debate in legal theory
2860:Black's Law Dictionary, 8th Edition
2835:Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law
2370:. Causelists.nic.in. Archived from
2368:"Supreme Court of India Cause List"
1972:Chermerinsky, Edwin (9 July 2018).
1645:Fallon, Richard (1 November 2013).
708:member states of the European Union
452:had the authority to dismantle the
437:Abood v. Detroit Board of Education
305:minimalist definitions of democracy
2760:"Judicial selection in the states"
1804:The real case of judicial activism
1647:"Interpreting Presidential Powers"
1467:, Rowman & Littlefield: 1999,
25:
1869:University of Illinois Law Review
949:{{Translated|he|אקטיביזם שיפוטי}}
486:Constitution of the United States
2910:Journal of Common Market Studies
1560:See also, Alschuler, Albert W.,
976:
877:
591:
102:
3032:McGill-Queen's University Press
2736:English Law - The New Dimension
2608:English Law - The New Dimension
2399:. Lawmin.nic.in. Archived from
2070:"Hot Topics: Judicial Activism"
1683:(94-1039), 517 U.S. 620 (1996).
1415:, Yale University Press, 2008,
27:Controversial judicial practice
2851:Politics in the European Union
2122:EUabc – Cassis de Djion case:
2088:"Judicial Activism Bush Style"
1734:78 Geo. L. J. 281 (1989-1990)
1540:. Princeton University Press.
1325:Haines, Charles Grove (1944).
1315:Craig Green, August 2008, p. 4
947:You may also add the template
1:
2216:Economic and Political Weekly
1946:Bruno, Robert (21 May 2018).
1497:Davis, Lewis Anthony (1981).
641:. This ruling confirmed that
397:recount of ballots in Florida
2284:"The Supreme Court of India"
2124:http://en.euabc.com/word/140
1156:Rule according to higher law
1131:Letter and spirit of the law
1010:2023 Israeli judicial reform
835:rejected the candidature of
409:corporate political spending
2397:"The Constitution Of India"
2288:Courts in Federal Countries
1860:Stone, Geoffrey R. (2012).
1536:Tamanaha, Brian Z. (2010).
1180:Wolfe, Christopher (1997).
960:Knowledge (XXG):Translation
503:Judicial activism in Canada
381:United States Supreme Court
356:Brown v. Board of Education
125:, discuss the issue on the
3102:
2267:Rai, Diva (22 June 2021).
2197:www.lloydlawcollege.edu.in
1708:10.1177/0067205X9001900101
1353:Canon, Bradley C. (1983).
1007:
911:Machine translation, like
847:public interest litigation
819:. Other countries such as
735:Public Interest Litigation
622:
500:
385:2000 presidential election
343:
292:
267:
218:
197:, said in an interview on
18:Judicial Activism In India
2957:10.1007/978-3-030-35085-7
2945:Grover, Sonja C. (2020).
2837:(1996), Merriam-Webster.
1503:Administrative Law Review
1301:comprised a middle group.
1235:Kmiec, Keenan D. (2004).
1071:Baroness Hale of Richmond
892:the corresponding article
696:European Court of Justice
635:European Court of Justice
317:Parliamentary sovereignty
2858:Bryan A. Garner (1999).
2734:Scarman, Leslie (1974).
2606:Scarman, Leslie (1974).
2050:Filipovic, Jill (2023).
1341:Geo. JL & Pub. Pol'y
1109:Constitutional economics
1037:Public-interest immunity
309:electoral accountability
289:Electoral accountability
47:statutory interpretation
2922:10.1111/1468-5965.00390
2796:"Judges and Parliament"
2306:10.3138/j.ctt1whm97c.12
2135:Bache & George 2006
1782:Albany Law Review, 2005
1604:Ely, John Hart (1980).
1591:The Heritage Foundation
1411:Kermit Roosevelt, III,
1115:Government by Judiciary
958:For more guidance, see
565:Supreme Court of Canada
43:judicial interpretation
1835:McClatchy News Service
1606:Democracy and Distrust
845:. The introduction of
757:
732:control the judiciary.
728:the Emergency in India
515:. By the principle of
494:
299:Legitimacy (political)
254:Critical legal studies
163:Black's Law Dictionary
62:Arthur Schlesinger Jr.
2990:Yale University Press
2179:legalserviceindia.com
1746:Don E. Fehrenbacher,
1585:Slattery, Elizabeth.
1020:Israeli Supreme Court
931:copyright attribution
762:Constitution of India
578:universal health care
425:Fourteenth Amendment.
282:Richard H. Fallon Jr.
270:Judicial independence
264:Judicial independence
3081:Conflict of interest
3034:Publishers), 310pp.
3013:Publishers), 336pp.
2992:Publishers), 272pp.
2984:, October 15, 2006.
2688:UK Human Rights Blog
2438:T. R. Andhyarujina,
1463:Frederick P. Lewis,
1381:www.law.uchicago.edu
833:Allahabad High Court
631:Cassis de Dijon Case
517:separation of powers
416:Obergefell v. Hodges
313:political legitimacy
182:Kermit Roosevelt III
131:create a new article
123:improve this article
51:separation of powers
2951:. Springer Nature.
2784:. 18 December 2019.
2638:. 25 September 2019
2246:The Washington Post
1829:(26 January 2010).
1401:. 29 December 2023.
1141:Living Constitution
247:judicial discretion
3061:Constitutional law
2470:on 5 November 2012
2463:The Times of India
2374:on 19 January 2014
2325:The New York Times
2230:– via JSTOR.
1978:The Sacramento Bee
1952:chicagotribune.com
1918:The New York Times
1809:2016-03-07 at the
1778:2011-11-25 at the
1696:Federal Law Review
1399:www.britannica.com
1297:and Chief Justice
1212:www.britannica.com
988:. You can help by
939:interlanguage link
851:V. R. Krishna Iyer
785:Fundamental Rights
603:. You can help by
540:Beverley McLachlin
421:Due Process Clause
363:of public schools.
321:legislative bodies
175:judicial precedent
35:judicial restraint
3076:Philosophy of law
3056:Judicial activism
3005:, July 30, 2006.
2966:978-3-030-35085-7
2897:978-0-8050-7791-9
2878:Greenhouse, Linda
2664:. 23 October 2011
2516:www.commonlii.org
2222:(43): 4433–4439.
2092:Rewire News Group
1794:, pp. 135–36
1769:Albany Law Review
1756:978-0-8203-1119-7
1547:978-0-691-14279-1
1429:978-0-300-12691-4
1183:Judicial activism
1151:Philosophy of law
1121:Impact litigation
1060:Maastricht Treaty
1056:William Rees-Mogg
1006:
1005:
971:
970:
904:
900:
815:as part of their
793:'basic structure'
621:
620:
573:Chaoulli v Quebec
542:has stated that:
329:Constitutionalism
239:Sunset provisions
203:, with regard to
187:solicitor general
159:
158:
151:
133:, as appropriate.
31:Judicial activism
16:(Redirected from
3093:
3071:Sociology of law
3066:Activism by type
2982:Kermit Roosevelt
2978:
2933:
2901:
2873:
2854:
2845:
2822:
2821:
2818:www.judiciary.uk
2810:
2804:
2803:
2800:www.judiciary.uk
2792:
2786:
2785:
2774:
2768:
2767:
2756:
2750:
2749:
2731:
2725:
2724:
2722:
2720:
2706:
2700:
2699:
2697:
2695:
2680:
2674:
2673:
2671:
2669:
2654:
2648:
2647:
2645:
2643:
2628:
2622:
2621:
2603:
2597:
2596:
2594:
2592:
2586:www.casemine.com
2578:
2572:
2571:
2569:
2567:
2552:
2546:
2545:
2543:
2541:
2526:
2520:
2519:
2508:
2502:
2501:
2499:
2497:
2486:
2480:
2479:
2477:
2475:
2466:. Archived from
2453:
2447:
2436:
2430:
2429:
2419:
2413:
2412:
2410:
2408:
2393:
2384:
2383:
2381:
2379:
2364:
2358:
2357:
2355:
2353:
2344:. Archived from
2338:
2329:
2328:
2316:
2310:
2309:
2279:
2273:
2272:
2264:
2258:
2257:
2255:
2253:
2238:
2232:
2231:
2207:
2201:
2200:
2189:
2183:
2182:
2171:
2165:
2159:
2153:
2147:
2138:
2132:
2126:
2120:
2114:
2113:
2102:
2096:
2095:
2084:
2078:
2077:
2066:
2060:
2059:
2047:
2041:
2040:
2038:
2036:
2021:
2015:
2014:
2012:
2010:
1995:
1989:
1988:
1986:
1984:
1969:
1963:
1962:
1960:
1958:
1943:
1937:
1936:
1934:
1932:
1909:
1903:
1902:
1900:
1898:
1883:
1877:
1876:
1866:
1857:
1851:
1850:
1848:
1846:
1841:on 15 March 2010
1837:. Archived from
1823:
1817:
1814:The Times Herald
1801:
1795:
1789:
1783:
1765:
1759:
1744:
1738:
1737:
1726:
1720:
1719:
1691:
1685:
1665:
1659:
1658:
1651:Duke Law Journal
1642:
1636:
1626:
1620:
1619:
1601:
1595:
1594:
1582:
1576:
1571:
1565:
1558:
1552:
1551:
1533:
1527:
1526:
1494:
1488:
1483:Matt Sedensky, "
1481:
1475:
1461:
1455:
1454:
1451:Fox News Channel
1438:
1432:
1409:
1403:
1402:
1391:
1385:
1384:
1373:
1367:
1366:
1350:
1344:
1337:
1331:
1330:
1322:
1316:
1310:
1304:
1303:
1247:(5): 1441–1477.
1232:
1226:
1225:
1220:
1218:
1204:
1198:
1197:
1177:
1087:Sir Stephen Laws
1001:
998:
980:
973:
950:
944:
917:Google Translate
902:
898:
881:
880:
873:
855:Delhi Government
789:right to privacy
704:Irish Government
702:in Ireland, the
694:will enable the
651:member-state law
616:
613:
595:
588:
323:as supreme over
154:
147:
143:
140:
134:
106:
105:
98:
80:Thomas Jefferson
21:
3101:
3100:
3096:
3095:
3094:
3092:
3091:
3090:
3046:
3045:
3044:
2967:
2944:
2940:
2938:Further reading
2907:
2898:
2876:
2870:
2857:
2848:
2833:
2830:
2825:
2812:
2811:
2807:
2794:
2793:
2789:
2776:
2775:
2771:
2758:
2757:
2753:
2746:
2733:
2732:
2728:
2718:
2716:
2708:
2707:
2703:
2693:
2691:
2690:. 23 March 2015
2682:
2681:
2677:
2667:
2665:
2662:The Independent
2656:
2655:
2651:
2641:
2639:
2630:
2629:
2625:
2618:
2605:
2604:
2600:
2590:
2588:
2580:
2579:
2575:
2565:
2563:
2554:
2553:
2549:
2539:
2537:
2536:. 20 April 2012
2528:
2527:
2523:
2510:
2509:
2505:
2495:
2493:
2488:
2487:
2483:
2473:
2471:
2455:
2454:
2450:
2437:
2433:
2422:Singh, Satbir.
2421:
2420:
2416:
2406:
2404:
2403:on 2 April 2012
2395:
2394:
2387:
2377:
2375:
2366:
2365:
2361:
2351:
2349:
2348:on 4 March 2016
2340:
2339:
2332:
2318:
2317:
2313:
2298:
2281:
2280:
2276:
2266:
2265:
2261:
2251:
2249:
2248:. 24 March 2020
2240:
2239:
2235:
2209:
2208:
2204:
2191:
2190:
2186:
2173:
2172:
2168:
2160:
2156:
2148:
2141:
2133:
2129:
2121:
2117:
2104:
2103:
2099:
2094:. 20 June 2006.
2086:
2085:
2081:
2068:
2067:
2063:
2049:
2048:
2044:
2034:
2032:
2023:
2022:
2018:
2008:
2006:
1997:
1996:
1992:
1982:
1980:
1971:
1970:
1966:
1956:
1954:
1945:
1944:
1940:
1930:
1928:
1911:
1910:
1906:
1896:
1894:
1885:
1884:
1880:
1864:
1859:
1858:
1854:
1844:
1842:
1827:Mann, Thomas E.
1825:
1824:
1820:
1811:Wayback Machine
1802:
1798:
1792:Greenhouse 2005
1790:
1786:
1780:Wayback Machine
1771:, Summer 2005,
1766:
1762:
1745:
1741:
1728:
1727:
1723:
1693:
1692:
1688:
1666:
1662:
1644:
1643:
1639:
1627:
1623:
1616:
1603:
1602:
1598:
1584:
1583:
1579:
1572:
1568:
1559:
1555:
1548:
1535:
1534:
1530:
1496:
1495:
1491:
1482:
1478:
1462:
1458:
1447:Fox News Sunday
1440:
1439:
1435:
1410:
1406:
1393:
1392:
1388:
1383:. 12 July 2010.
1375:
1374:
1370:
1352:
1351:
1347:
1338:
1334:
1324:
1323:
1319:
1311:
1307:
1253:10.2307/3481421
1234:
1233:
1229:
1216:
1214:
1206:
1205:
1201:
1194:
1179:
1178:
1174:
1170:
1165:
1099:
1091:Policy Exchange
1033:Conway v Rimmer
1028:
1012:
1002:
996:
993:
986:needs expansion
967:
966:
965:
948:
942:
905:
882:
878:
871:
857:to convert the
774:judicial review
758:
724:
627:
617:
611:
608:
601:needs expansion
586:
532:Canadian Courts
505:
499:
431:Janus v. AFSCME
348:
342:
337:
301:
291:
276:majoritarianism
272:
266:
231:judicial review
227:
225:Legal formalism
217:
209:Anthony Kennedy
200:Fox News Sunday
155:
144:
138:
135:
120:
107:
103:
96:
59:
28:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
3099:
3097:
3089:
3088:
3083:
3078:
3073:
3068:
3063:
3058:
3048:
3047:
3043:
3042:
3021:
3003:James B. Kelly
3000:
2979:
2965:
2941:
2939:
2936:
2935:
2934:
2905:
2902:
2896:
2874:
2868:
2862:. West Group.
2855:
2846:
2829:
2826:
2824:
2823:
2805:
2787:
2769:
2751:
2744:
2726:
2701:
2675:
2649:
2623:
2616:
2598:
2573:
2547:
2521:
2503:
2481:
2448:
2431:
2414:
2385:
2359:
2330:
2311:
2296:
2274:
2259:
2233:
2202:
2184:
2166:
2154:
2150:Moravcsik 2002
2139:
2127:
2115:
2097:
2079:
2061:
2042:
2031:. 18 June 2020
2016:
2005:. 18 June 2020
1990:
1964:
1938:
1904:
1893:. 26 June 2015
1878:
1852:
1818:
1816:, June 2, 2009
1796:
1784:
1760:
1739:
1721:
1686:
1674:Romer v. Evans
1671:'s dissent in
1669:Antonin Scalia
1660:
1637:
1621:
1614:
1596:
1577:
1566:
1553:
1546:
1528:
1489:
1476:
1456:
1433:
1404:
1386:
1368:
1345:
1332:
1317:
1305:
1227:
1199:
1192:
1171:
1169:
1166:
1164:
1163:
1158:
1153:
1148:
1143:
1138:
1133:
1128:
1123:
1118:
1111:
1106:
1100:
1098:
1095:
1027:
1026:United Kingdom
1024:
1004:
1003:
983:
981:
969:
968:
964:
963:
956:
945:
923:
920:
909:
906:
899:(January 2023)
887:
886:
885:
883:
876:
870:
867:
751:
747:New York Times
723:
720:
673:EU integration
619:
618:
598:
596:
585:
584:European Union
582:
570:The judgment
561:Rosalie Abella
553:
552:
498:
495:
490:Bill of Rights
474:George W. Bush
470:
469:
461:
441:
427:
412:
400:
389:George W. Bush
372:
364:
341:
338:
336:
333:
295:Accountability
290:
287:
265:
262:
235:interpretation
216:
213:
195:Theodore Olson
191:George W. Bush
157:
156:
117:of the subject
115:worldwide view
110:
108:
101:
95:
92:
58:
55:
26:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
3098:
3087:
3084:
3082:
3079:
3077:
3074:
3072:
3069:
3067:
3064:
3062:
3059:
3057:
3054:
3053:
3051:
3041:
3040:0-7735-3054-1
3037:
3033:
3029:
3025:
3024:Rory Leishman
3022:
3020:
3019:0-7748-1212-5
3016:
3012:
3008:
3004:
3001:
2999:
2998:0-300-11468-0
2995:
2991:
2987:
2983:
2980:
2976:
2972:
2968:
2962:
2958:
2954:
2950:
2949:
2943:
2942:
2937:
2931:
2927:
2923:
2919:
2915:
2911:
2906:
2903:
2899:
2893:
2889:
2885:
2884:
2879:
2875:
2871:
2869:0-314-15199-0
2865:
2861:
2856:
2852:
2847:
2844:
2843:0-87779-604-1
2840:
2836:
2832:
2831:
2827:
2819:
2815:
2809:
2806:
2801:
2797:
2791:
2788:
2783:
2779:
2773:
2770:
2765:
2761:
2755:
2752:
2747:
2745:9780420446909
2741:
2737:
2730:
2727:
2715:
2711:
2705:
2702:
2689:
2685:
2679:
2676:
2663:
2659:
2653:
2650:
2637:
2633:
2627:
2624:
2619:
2617:9780420446909
2613:
2609:
2602:
2599:
2587:
2583:
2577:
2574:
2562:on 5 May 2014
2561:
2557:
2551:
2548:
2535:
2534:en.idi.org.il
2531:
2525:
2522:
2517:
2513:
2507:
2504:
2491:
2485:
2482:
2469:
2465:
2464:
2459:
2452:
2449:
2445:
2441:
2435:
2432:
2427:
2426:
2418:
2415:
2402:
2398:
2392:
2390:
2386:
2373:
2369:
2363:
2360:
2347:
2343:
2337:
2335:
2331:
2326:
2322:
2315:
2312:
2307:
2303:
2299:
2297:9781487500627
2293:
2289:
2285:
2278:
2275:
2270:
2263:
2260:
2247:
2243:
2237:
2234:
2229:
2225:
2221:
2217:
2213:
2206:
2203:
2198:
2194:
2188:
2185:
2180:
2176:
2170:
2167:
2164:
2158:
2155:
2151:
2146:
2144:
2140:
2136:
2131:
2128:
2125:
2119:
2116:
2111:
2110:law2.umkc.edu
2107:
2101:
2098:
2093:
2089:
2083:
2080:
2075:
2071:
2065:
2062:
2057:
2053:
2046:
2043:
2030:
2026:
2020:
2017:
2004:
2000:
1994:
1991:
1979:
1975:
1968:
1965:
1953:
1949:
1942:
1939:
1927:
1923:
1919:
1915:
1908:
1905:
1892:
1888:
1882:
1879:
1875:(2): 485–500.
1874:
1870:
1863:
1856:
1853:
1840:
1836:
1832:
1828:
1822:
1819:
1815:
1812:
1808:
1805:
1800:
1797:
1793:
1788:
1785:
1781:
1777:
1774:
1770:
1764:
1761:
1757:
1753:
1749:
1743:
1740:
1735:
1731:
1725:
1722:
1717:
1713:
1709:
1705:
1701:
1697:
1690:
1687:
1684:
1682:
1676:
1675:
1670:
1664:
1661:
1657:(2): 347–392.
1656:
1652:
1648:
1641:
1638:
1635:
1631:
1625:
1622:
1617:
1615:0-674-19636-8
1611:
1607:
1600:
1597:
1592:
1588:
1581:
1578:
1575:
1570:
1567:
1563:
1557:
1554:
1549:
1543:
1539:
1532:
1529:
1524:
1520:
1516:
1512:
1508:
1504:
1500:
1493:
1490:
1486:
1480:
1477:
1474:
1473:0-8476-8992-1
1470:
1466:
1460:
1457:
1452:
1448:
1444:
1437:
1434:
1430:
1426:
1422:
1421:0-300-12691-3
1418:
1414:
1408:
1405:
1400:
1396:
1390:
1387:
1382:
1378:
1372:
1369:
1365:(6): 236–247.
1364:
1360:
1356:
1349:
1346:
1342:
1336:
1333:
1328:
1321:
1318:
1314:
1309:
1306:
1302:
1300:
1296:
1292:
1288:
1284:
1280:
1276:
1272:
1268:
1262:
1258:
1254:
1250:
1246:
1242:
1238:
1231:
1228:
1224:
1213:
1209:
1203:
1200:
1195:
1193:0-8476-8531-4
1189:
1185:
1184:
1176:
1173:
1167:
1162:
1159:
1157:
1154:
1152:
1149:
1147:
1144:
1142:
1139:
1137:
1134:
1132:
1129:
1127:
1124:
1122:
1119:
1117:
1116:
1112:
1110:
1107:
1105:
1102:
1101:
1096:
1094:
1092:
1088:
1084:
1080:
1079:Richard Ekins
1075:
1072:
1067:
1065:
1061:
1057:
1052:
1048:
1047:
1042:
1038:
1034:
1025:
1023:
1021:
1017:
1011:
1000:
991:
987:
984:This section
982:
979:
975:
974:
961:
957:
954:
946:
940:
936:
932:
928:
924:
921:
918:
914:
910:
908:
907:
901:
895:
893:
888:You can help
884:
875:
874:
868:
866:
864:
860:
859:Auto rickshaw
856:
852:
848:
844:
843:
838:
837:Indira Gandhi
834:
830:
826:
822:
818:
817:jurisprudence
814:
810:
806:
802:
798:
797:Supreme Court
794:
790:
786:
782:
779:
775:
771:
767:
763:
756:
750:
748:
744:
740:
736:
733:
729:
721:
719:
717:
716:Lisbon Treaty
714:voted on the
713:
709:
705:
701:
700:Lisbon Treaty
697:
693:
692:Lisbon Treaty
689:
685:
680:
678:
677:member-states
674:
669:
667:
662:
660:
656:
652:
648:
644:
640:
636:
632:
626:
615:
606:
602:
599:This section
597:
594:
590:
589:
583:
581:
579:
575:
574:
568:
566:
562:
558:
551:
549:
545:
544:
543:
541:
536:
533:
529:
525:
522:Canada has a
520:
518:
514:
510:
504:
496:
493:
491:
487:
483:
477:
475:
467:
466:
462:
459:
455:
451:
447:
446:
442:
439:
438:
433:
432:
428:
426:
422:
418:
417:
413:
410:
406:
405:
401:
398:
394:
390:
386:
382:
378:
377:
373:
370:
369:
365:
362:
361:desegregation
358:
357:
353:
352:
351:
347:
340:United States
339:
334:
332:
330:
326:
322:
318:
314:
311:as source of
310:
306:
300:
296:
288:
286:
283:
279:
277:
271:
263:
261:
257:
255:
251:
248:
242:
240:
236:
233:and that the
232:
226:
222:
214:
212:
210:
206:
202:
201:
196:
192:
188:
183:
178:
176:
171:
167:
165:
164:
153:
150:
142:
132:
128:
124:
118:
116:
109:
100:
99:
93:
91:
89:
88:John Marshall
85:
81:
76:
72:
70:
68:
63:
56:
54:
52:
48:
44:
40:
36:
32:
19:
3027:
3026:, May 2006.
3006:
2985:
2947:
2913:
2909:
2886:. New York:
2882:
2859:
2850:
2834:
2817:
2808:
2799:
2790:
2782:the Guardian
2781:
2772:
2763:
2754:
2735:
2729:
2717:. Retrieved
2713:
2704:
2692:. Retrieved
2687:
2678:
2666:. Retrieved
2661:
2652:
2640:. Retrieved
2635:
2626:
2607:
2601:
2589:. Retrieved
2585:
2576:
2564:. Retrieved
2560:the original
2550:
2538:. Retrieved
2533:
2524:
2515:
2506:
2494:. Retrieved
2484:
2472:. Retrieved
2468:the original
2461:
2451:
2443:
2434:
2424:
2417:
2405:. Retrieved
2401:the original
2376:. Retrieved
2372:the original
2362:
2350:. Retrieved
2346:the original
2324:
2314:
2287:
2277:
2262:
2250:. Retrieved
2245:
2236:
2219:
2215:
2205:
2196:
2187:
2178:
2169:
2157:
2130:
2118:
2109:
2100:
2091:
2082:
2076:. July 2003.
2073:
2064:
2056:The Guardian
2055:
2045:
2033:. Retrieved
2028:
2019:
2007:. Retrieved
2002:
1993:
1981:. Retrieved
1977:
1967:
1955:. Retrieved
1951:
1941:
1929:. Retrieved
1917:
1907:
1895:. Retrieved
1890:
1881:
1872:
1868:
1855:
1843:. Retrieved
1839:the original
1821:
1813:
1799:
1787:
1768:
1763:
1747:
1742:
1733:
1724:
1699:
1695:
1689:
1680:
1672:
1663:
1654:
1650:
1640:
1624:
1605:
1599:
1590:
1580:
1569:
1561:
1556:
1537:
1531:
1506:
1502:
1492:
1479:
1464:
1459:
1446:
1436:
1412:
1407:
1398:
1389:
1380:
1371:
1362:
1358:
1348:
1340:
1335:
1320:
1308:
1264:
1244:
1240:
1230:
1222:
1215:. Retrieved
1211:
1202:
1182:
1175:
1113:
1076:
1068:
1044:
1040:
1032:
1029:
1013:
997:January 2023
994:
990:adding to it
985:
935:edit summary
926:
897:
889:
840:
783:
778:B R Ambedkar
759:
753:
746:
725:
681:
670:
663:
628:
609:
605:adding to it
600:
571:
569:
554:
546:
537:
524:legal system
521:
506:
479:
471:
463:
458:Barack Obama
450:Donald Trump
443:
435:
429:
414:
402:
376:Bush v. Gore
374:
366:
354:
349:
302:
280:
273:
258:
252:
243:
228:
198:
179:
172:
168:
161:
160:
145:
136:
112:
77:
73:
66:
60:
30:
29:
2888:Times Books
2764:Ballotpedia
2496:21 December
2474:21 December
2407:21 December
2378:21 December
2352:21 December
1702:(1): 1–30.
1283:Frankfurter
1241:Cal. L. Rev
1217:18 February
1146:Originalism
1083:John Finnis
849:by Justice
801:Article 368
659:EU treaties
653:. When the
368:Roe v. Wade
94:Definitions
3050:Categories
2828:References
2719:23 January
2694:22 January
2668:22 January
2642:23 January
2591:22 January
2106:"Untitled"
2074:fedsoc.org
2035:9 December
2029:LewisForMN
2009:9 December
1983:25 October
1957:25 October
1931:25 October
1891:SCOTUSblog
1359:Judicature
1104:Certiorari
1064:Eurodollar
1035:(1968); a
1008:See also:
805:Bangladesh
768:, because
743:"Suo motu"
739:cognizance
623:See also:
509:common law
501:See also:
344:See also:
335:By country
293:See also:
268:See also:
219:See also:
84:Federalist
3011:UBC Press
2975:213018800
2930:153441715
2444:The Hindu
1926:0362-4331
1716:0067-205X
1515:0001-8368
1126:Kritarchy
953:talk page
894:in Hebrew
821:Singapore
766:Austinian
612:July 2022
513:judgement
325:judiciary
307:focus on
127:talk page
57:Etymology
39:precedent
3086:Rhetoric
2880:(2005).
2636:BBC News
2540:20 April
1845:29 April
1807:Archived
1776:Archived
1667:Justice
1523:40709182
1279:Rutledge
1097:See also
1051:prorogue
929:provide
813:Malaysia
809:Pakistan
688:abortion
666:treaties
655:treaties
488:and the
423:and the
139:May 2017
121:You may
69:magazine
2714:AP NEWS
2252:11 June
2228:4412779
1897:3 April
1679:Romer,
1634:2310915
1287:Jackson
1271:Douglas
1261:3481421
951:to the
933:in the
896:.
712:Ireland
682:In the
647:primacy
639:EU laws
629:In the
567:bench.
393:Al Gore
67:Fortune
3038:
3017:
2996:
2973:
2963:
2928:
2894:
2866:
2841:
2742:
2614:
2566:15 May
2304:
2294:
2226:
1924:
1754:
1714:
1632:
1612:
1544:
1521:
1513:
1471:
1427:
1419:
1343:, 2002
1299:Vinson
1291:Burton
1289:, and
1277:, and
1275:Murphy
1259:
1190:
1085:, and
1041:Miller
869:Israel
829:Uganda
825:Belize
643:EU law
633:, the
528:Quebec
497:Canada
379:– The
319:views
189:under
49:, and
2971:S2CID
2926:S2CID
2916:(4).
2302:JSTOR
2224:JSTOR
1865:(PDF)
1519:JSTOR
1267:Black
1257:JSTOR
1168:Notes
913:DeepL
722:India
649:over
129:, or
3036:ISBN
3015:ISBN
2994:ISBN
2961:ISBN
2892:ISBN
2864:ISBN
2839:ISBN
2740:ISBN
2721:2021
2696:2021
2670:2021
2644:2021
2612:ISBN
2593:2021
2568:2014
2542:2024
2498:2013
2476:2013
2409:2013
2380:2013
2354:2013
2292:ISBN
2254:2022
2037:2020
2011:2020
1985:2020
1959:2020
1933:2020
1922:ISSN
1899:2017
1873:2012
1847:2010
1752:ISBN
1712:ISSN
1630:SSRN
1610:ISBN
1542:ISBN
1511:ISSN
1469:ISBN
1425:ISBN
1417:ISBN
1295:Reed
1219:2022
1188:ISBN
927:must
925:You
863:smog
827:and
811:and
776:and
645:has
391:and
297:and
223:and
2953:doi
2918:doi
2003:NPR
1704:doi
1249:doi
992:.
915:or
839:in
607:.
530:).
3052::
2969:.
2959:.
2924:.
2914:40
2912:.
2890:.
2816:.
2798:.
2780:.
2762:.
2712:.
2686:.
2660:.
2634:.
2584:.
2532:.
2514:.
2460:.
2442:,
2388:^
2333:^
2323:.
2300:.
2286:.
2244:.
2220:37
2218:.
2214:.
2195:.
2177:.
2142:^
2108:.
2090:.
2072:.
2054:.
2027:.
2001:.
1976:.
1950:.
1920:.
1916:.
1889:.
1871:.
1867:.
1833:.
1732:.
1710:.
1700:19
1698:.
1677:;
1655:63
1653:.
1649:.
1589:.
1517:.
1507:33
1505:.
1501:.
1449:.
1445:.
1423:,
1397:.
1379:.
1363:66
1361:.
1357:.
1285:,
1273:,
1269:,
1263:.
1255:.
1245:92
1243:.
1239:.
1221:.
1210:.
1089:.
1081:,
823:,
807:,
679:.
668:.
387:,
327:.
193:,
90:.
53:.
45:,
3030:(
3009:(
2988:(
2977:.
2955::
2932:.
2920::
2900:.
2872:.
2820:.
2802:.
2766:.
2748:.
2723:.
2698:.
2672:.
2646:.
2620:.
2595:.
2570:.
2544:.
2518:.
2500:.
2478:.
2411:.
2382:.
2356:.
2327:.
2308:.
2271:.
2256:.
2199:.
2181:.
2152:.
2137:.
2112:.
2058:.
2039:.
2013:.
1987:.
1961:.
1935:.
1901:.
1849:.
1758:.
1736:.
1718:.
1706::
1618:.
1593:.
1550:.
1525:.
1453:.
1431:.
1251::
1196:.
999:)
995:(
962:.
955:.
614:)
610:(
460:.
440:.
152:)
146:(
141:)
137:(
119:.
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.