Topic: We should limit judicial activism
judicial activism as led to the undeserved punishment of innocent people, simply because a judge couldn't control thier emotions
judicial activism can be a good thing. sometimes someone is truly guilty but there isn’t enough evidence. if judicial activism was enacted then that person can still be punished.
judicial activism can be beneficial if a judge rules in favour and over turns rules that have previously predjudiced against minorities or unfair rules
judicial activism can be beneficial in some cases.
judicial activism can be damaging as it's based purely on opinion, opinions can be wrong and can also be influenced.
judicial activism can be used to push  an agenda that does not line up with the country's best interest.
judicial activism can be useful to prevent truly bad people who abuse the letter of the law to skirt punishment.
judicial activism can bring a new view to things & help change a bad view  around
judicial activism can bring wrongful convictions due to prejudice
judicial activism can give a court wider scope when coming to a decision. some cases are not straight forward, possibly judicial activism would be beneficial in these scenarios.
judicial activism can give proper justice to those when the law isn't completely clear
judicial activism can have poor results
judicial activism can help to better represent the will of the people as a whole
judicial activism can highlight wrong legislation, or deliver accurate justice that cannot be addressed through the existing laws
judicial activism can lead to judicial reform
judicial activism can prove to be one sided in many cases.
judicial activism can result in disproportionate punishments on the whim of one person.
judicial activism can result in people not being punished properly for their crimes.
judicial activism can skew the law and make it unfair so we should limit judicial activism.
judicial activism can sometimes be the only antidote to a crooked administration
judicial activism can sometimes veer far away from the will of the people and this is an unfair amount of power.
judicial activism can stop miscarriage of justice.
judicial activism circumvents the original meaning of a law to make is say whatever the judge wants it to say.
judicial activism could be useful in defending rights of a disaffected minority group
judicial activism could lead to a decision being made based on the false beliefs of one person.
judicial activism does not follow the rule of law and tries to take on a job that is not suppose to be done by jurists.
judicial activism does not fully follow the law as it does not take enough notice of precedents set.
judicial activism does not improve decisions
judicial activism enables  judges to override any law that exists, which means new rules will be created and the existent laws might not be followed.
judicial activism exists to ensure the most disadvantaged people of whom no one is aware
judicial activism gives the government too much control.
judicial activism goes against our system  of what is best for the people.
judicial activism goes against the law.
judicial activism goes against the rule of law