The philosophy of judicial activism would suggest that the supreme court should a) only 4 b) 3 and 4 c) 1, 2, and 3 d) 2, 3, and 4

Judicial activism is the philosophy of issuing judicial rulings based on the personal opinion rather than giving judgments based on the legality of the constitution.

Explanation:

It is based upon the political and personal consideration of the judges and it paves way for the judgments to be biased at the end.

Judicial activism is to an extent considered to be the aspect of relief of a common man. Legislative proceedings when followed may at times lead an individual to lose faith on democracy. But many a times, judicial activism can be used as a super power while giving clear interpretation of the laws mentioned in the constitution.

3 and 4. Statements 1 and 2 are incorrect. Judicial activism describes judicial rulings suspected of being based on personal or political considerations rather than on existing law. The question of judicial activism is closely related to constitutional interpretation, statutory construction, and separation of powers.