Assessment of Sumpreme Court Rulings in 1964.
Lyndon Johnson defeated Barry Goldwater to remain president. Cassius Clay beat Sonny Liston to attain the Heavyweight Championship. The Beatles were topping the charts with "A Hard Day's Night". But most importantly, congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This law intended intended to end discrimination based on race, color, religion, or national origin. It is generally considered the most important U.S. law on civil rights since Reconstruction. This law was so sweeping and controversial that the Supreme Court docit was to hear cases dealing with its ramifications almost immediently. The matter of this report is to analize ruling of the court in 1964, and decide if they were activist or restrainist, and if they were interpretivist or noninterpretivist. These bodies of thought deal with the ideal of judicial review, which refers to a case that deals the system of federalism and how it affects the Supreme Court's power. Judicial review was established in 1803 with the case of Marbury v. Madison. Federalism deals with the problems that arise between the states and the federal branch of government. It usually tries to decide what brach has the power to rule in a given matter. .
Activist believe that when the elected branches of government (usually Congress) are allowed to decide what should be and what is legal, you are letting them overstep thier powers as stated in the Constitution. They do not believe that they should be allowed to judge thier own laws on thier legality. A court of activist would be more steadfast in asserting thier own interpretation of the Constitution, even at the risk of making laws passed by Congress void. Restrainist, on the otherhand, believe that they should respect, support, and uphold the actions of Congress, as long they do not abuse the power buy passing laws in obvious violation of the Constitution.
