Difficulty: Medium

Average Score: 54%

"The interpretation of the laws is the proper and peculiar province of the courts. A constitution is in fact, and must be, regarded by the judges as a fundamental law. It therefore belongs to them to ascertain its meaning as well as the meaning of any particular act proceeding from the legislative body."

Which principle is reflected in the passage?

Rationale

Judicial review is reflected in the passage.

The passage emphasizes the role of judges in interpreting the constitution and determining the meaning of laws, which is the essence of judicial review. This principle allows courts to evaluate the constitutionality of legislative acts and ensure they align with fundamental laws.

A (judicial activism) YOUR ANSWER

Judicial activism refers to the practice of judges making rulings based on personal or political considerations rather than existing law. The passage does not support this notion, as it emphasizes the judges' role in ascertaining the meaning of the law and the constitution, rather than acting on personal beliefs or social agendas.

B (judicial restraint) YOUR ANSWER

Judicial restraint advocates for judges to limit their own power and defer to the decisions of the legislative and executive branches. The passage, however, illustrates that judges have a responsibility to interpret the constitution and laws, which contrasts with the idea of restraint and suggests a more active role in judicial review.

C (judicial review) CORRECT

Judicial review is the principle that allows courts to interpret the constitution and assess the validity of legislative acts. The passage directly addresses this concept, stating that it is the court's duty to ascertain the meaning of both the constitution and legislative acts, clearly reflecting the judicial review process.

D (judicial supremacy) YOUR ANSWER

Judicial supremacy posits that the judiciary has the ultimate authority in interpreting the constitution and laws. While the passage indicates the importance of judicial interpretation, it does not explicitly endorse the idea of the judiciary being superior to other branches of government, thus making this choice less accurate than judicial review.

Conclusion

The passage clearly illustrates the principle of judicial review, which asserts that courts have the authority to interpret laws and the constitution. By highlighting the judges' role in understanding legislative acts, it establishes the importance of judicial review in maintaining the rule of law and constitutional governance. Other choices, while related to judicial functions, do not capture the specific interpretation presented in the passage.