In the last 50 or so years, the federal courts have struck down laws that prohibited abortion, allowed prayer in schools, prohibited flag burning, set limits on corporate political spending, and hundreds of others. Each of these laws had been passed by duly elected legislatures and signed by either a governor of a state or the President. Do you believe in the power of judicial review? Do you believe in the right of the Supreme Court to prohibit laws that have been passed through our democratic process? Why or why not? Consider the Case Cooper v. Aaron, a case which re-affirmed the power of judicial review, in consideration of your answer.

Aside from striking down laws, sometimes the courts make laws (this is called "Judicial Activism"). An example of judicial activism is the Miranda Rule: a requirement that a defendant must be informed of certain constitutional rights before interrogation. This rule was never passed by Congress...it is a court made law. With this background, the question is, do you believe that Courts should be activist and should make rules? Why or why not? (please refer to "Miranda v. Arizona