Judicial interpretation


Judicial interpretation

Judicial interpretation is a theory or mode of thought that explains how the judiciary should interpret the law, particularly constitutional documents and legislation (see statutory interpretation). An interpretation which results in or supports some form of law-making role for the judiciary in interpreting the law is sometimes pejoratively characterized as judicial activism, the opposite of which is judicial lethargy, with judicial restraint somewhere in between.

In the United States, theories of judicial interpretation range from originalism and strict constructionism to functionalism. The Constitution can be viewed as a Living Constitution or as The Moral Constitution.[citation needed]

See also


Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.

Look at other dictionaries:

  • Judicial review — is the power of the courts to annul the acts of the executive and/or the legislative power where it finds them incompatible with a higher norm. Judicial review is an example of the functioning of separation of powers in a modern governmental… …   Wikipedia

  • Judicial philosophy — is the set of ideas and beliefs which dictate how Justices and judges of the United States federal courts may rule in many cases. There is a large academic debate over judicial philosophy, with some supporting the theory that justices can be… …   Wikipedia

  • Judicial restraint — is a theory of judicial interpretation that encourages judges to limit the exercise of their own power. It asserts that judges should hesitate to strike down laws unless they are obviously unconstitutional.… …   Wikipedia

  • INTERPRETATION — This article is arranged according to the following outline: definition of terms bible exegesis substance of bible exegesis in jewish creative interpretation and integrative interpretation …   Encyclopedia of Judaism

  • interpretation — noun ADJECTIVE ▪ correct, right, true, valid ▪ erroneous, false, wrong ▪ plausible, possible …   Collocations dictionary

  • Judicial review in the United States — in terms of their lawfulness, or to review the constitutionality of a statute or treaty, or to review an administrative regulation for consistency with either a statute, a treaty, or the Constitution itself. At the federal level, there is no… …   Wikipedia

  • Judicial tyranny — The term Judicial tyranny is also political epithet often used to describe the actions of unelected judges whose rulings unlawfully validate or invalidate the policy decisions made by elected officials, unlawfully sustain or overrule enacted… …   Wikipedia

  • Judicial activism — is a pejorative term for the misuse of judicial power and is a neologism for the older classical term board judicial review . The most common connotation is subjective, in which the speaker condemns judicial decisions that, in the view of the… …   Wikipedia

  • Judicial Yuan — Constitutional Court 司法院 Established 1937 Jurisdiction Republic of China Location Taipei Composition method Presidential nomination with Legislative Yuan confirmation …   Wikipedia

  • Judicial system of Iran — قوه فضاییه جمهوری اسلامی ایران The main building of Judicial system of Iran in Tehran. Established 1979(modern) 1905(history) …   Wikipedia


Share the article and excerpts

Direct link
Do a right-click on the link above
and select “Copy Link”

We are using cookies for the best presentation of our site. Continuing to use this site, you agree with this.