Activist Judges: Undermining the Rule of Law and Devaluing Human Life? - Essay Sample

Introduction

Activist judges rule cases according to their opinion after listening to cases brought before them. Activist judges believe that their rulings are rational and fair. The decisions of activist judges lead to ethical concerns in the following ways:

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Some rulings activist judges make may undermine the rule of law. The rulings of an activist judge can override any law, and this means the laws do not apply to them.

Some activist judges may devalue human life. During the trial of Daniel Wade Moore, Judge Glenn Thompson overruled the jury's decision to sentence Wade to life in prison and sentenced him to death all because the jury said that Mr. Wade "did it"( https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/16/opinion/when-juries-say-life-and-judges-say-death.html). This is an example of how the power activist judges have can undermine human life.

As in the case above, the decisions some judges make on cases can interfere with their emotional health. Even after a whole jury decided to sentence Wade to life, Judge Thompson chose death over life. This shows how being an activist judge may make a person cold and emotionally unavailable.

The rulings activist judges make may be influenced by personal affairs. In some cases, activist judges make rulings based on selfish, personal reasons. For example, a Christian activist judge may overrule a jury's judge to allow abortion to take place.

Ethical Concerns of Constructionist Judges

Just as in the case of activist judges, constructionist judges may also undermine human life when passing on sentences. Constructionist judges follow the constitution in their rulings at all times, and may sentence some people to death if the constitution calls for that, even if thecrimes committed do not call for the death penalty.

Most constructionist judges often have their opinions on a case, but since they follow the constitution at all times, they may repress their opinions and emotions on the case in order to rule according to the law. The judge may feel he/she has ruled unfairly, but will repress these thoughts and emotions. This is unhealthy, and may even lead to depression.

Constructionist judges do not give helpful insight on sensitive issues that may require care when passing rulings. A constructionist judge only rules according to the law, and may not consider that the law has failed in that case.

The system of constructionist judges does not provide checks to maintain balance in the rule of law. If a constructionist passed a judgement that other activist judges viewed as unjust and appealed it, most often, the constructionist judge's judgement will win against the appeal because they would be backed by the constitution.

References

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/14/nyregion/the-96-year-old-brooklyn-judge-standing-up-to-the-supreme-court.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/nyregion/nypd-muslim-lawsuit-settlement.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/16/opinion/when-juries-say-life-and-judges-say-death.html

Fielding, N. G. (2011). Judges and their work. Social & Legal Studies, 20(1), 97-115.