Topic: We should limit judicial activism
laws are written to be followed as is and the job of a judge is to make sure that law is followed and not to use their own judgement of how it should be applied and when.
Lawyers and other court people should  do whats best for the people, not what's best for them.
Lawyers have the right to make what verdict they want, they shouldn't be limited
like almost any other decision-maker, a judge cannot help but be biased towards certain subjects.
limiting judicial activism ensures laws are uniformly carried out fairly and how intended.
many laws need to change with the times and a judge is in a better position than our elected officials to accurately and fairly review those laws.
members of the judicial system can be bought or coerced by political action groups or other bad actors
modern days require modern measures and judicial activism brings present day thinking and opinions into important cases to stay up to date
new interpretations and opinions during cases will bring a new era of justice and potential equality for minorities.
no one should be able to legislate from the judicial bench, it is congress's job to pass laws , not a judges
not all situations are clear cut with the laws on the books, so the judges need some leeway when making decisions.
one political party should not rule over us
only the law should be taken into account rather than opinions.
our justice system follows the constitution for a reason, and if more and more judicial activism takes place the us will have a broken justice system
our laws need to evolve with the times we are living in
people have a right to advocate for whomever they choose.
people have a right to stand up for whatever theyd like to
people should be judged by their actions not how the judge feels about them
personal interpretation creeping to judicial rulings is not only natural but should be expected.  some laws can be archaic, and allowing our process to include personal opinion is a good thing.
personal opinion allows for too much variability in sentencing therefore a high number of appeal will be inevitable
personal opinions and upbringing should not matter in an interpretation of law, we must limit judicial activism in the interest of fairness
personal opinions should not matter
some laws are unfair and judicial activism can correct those that need to be fixed.
some laws may not be great and need an opinion to result in  a more fair outcome.
some laws may not be the best, and opinions are needed.
some laws need to be changed and the only way to do it is through judicial activism.
some laws punish people too harshly and judicial activism allows a judge to consider the circumstances surrounding the crime when applying punishment.
some legal situations require discretion from the judge which judicial activism allows for.
sometimes a case has extenuating circumstances that would require a judge to make a different ruling.
sometimes cases bring up topics that aren't quite covered by a law and a judge must step in and make their own decision.
sometimes even though a law was passed it is a bad law.