Judicial tyrants ignore limits on their power and feel free to re-write statutes or even the Constitution. Tyranny vs. Restraint Judicial tyranny vs. judicial restraint is not a liberal vs. conservative issue. Sometimes decisions exhibiting judicial restraint yield liberal results. Nor is judicial tyranny a charge to make every time we disagree with a judge's ruling. Rather, we must concern ourselves with the essence of how judges perform their jobs.
Activist judges interpret laws as they choose.
Originalists, or restrained judges, believe the original intent of the law should govern. Tyrannical decisions from the U.S. Supreme Court have the most sweeping impact on Americans. The U.S. Court of Appeals rules that judges cannot require persons arrested for drunkenness to attend Alcoholics Anonymous. A judge holds that Washington state's ban on assisted suicide violates the Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The Supreme Court finds a woman's right to abortion protected by the Constitution's right to privacy.