| Description |
x, 237 pages ; 24 cm |
| Contents |
PART I. The United States -- 1. The origins of the judicial activism terminology -- 2. From description to slogan : the activist/self-restraint divide in US public debate -- PART II. Australia -- 3. 'Strict and complete legalism' in the High Court of Australia -- 4. The history wars and the High Court -- 5. Judicial activism as elitism : Wik, the implied rights cases and beyond -- Epilogue : judicial activism in Australia today |
| Summary |
"The term ‘judicial activism’ is seemingly ubiquitous in Australia and the United States today. Prominent public figures, from politicians to cardinals, commentators to business executives, have used this terminology to condemn superior courts and certain judicial outcomes. In Australia, High Court decisions on matters such as native title, property law and the interpretation of Australian history (for instance, Mabo); constitutional rights; the law of negligence; and migration law have been attacked in some quarters as being ‘undemocratic’ and ‘activist’, and as exemplifying the growing elitism of higher court judges. In the United States, decisions relating to reproductive rights; gun laws; school prayer; racial segregation and the interpretation of American history (for instance, Brown v Board of Education) have also been criticised on this basis. Yet as the judicial activism critique is increasingly adopted by the popular media, many lawyers and judges are hesitant to engage with the terminology, seeing it as nothing more than an empty pejorative."-- Publisher website |
| Bibliography |
Includes bibliographical references (pages 203-228) and index |
| Subject |
United States. Supreme Court -- History.
|
|
Australia. High Court -- History.
|
|
Political questions and judicial power -- Australia -- History.
|
|
Political questions and judicial power -- United States -- History.
|
|
Judicial discretion -- Australia -- History.
|
|
Judicial discretion -- United States -- History.
|
| ISBN |
9781760021436 (paperback) |
|
