Top 411 Judicial Quotes & Sayings - Page 2
Explore popular Judicial quotes.
Last updated on April 16, 2025.
A judicial activist is a judge who interprets the Constitution to mean what it would have said if he, instead of the Founding Fathers, had written it.
Morality cannot be legislated, but behavior can be regulated. Judicial decrees may not change the heart, but they can restrain the heartless.
The judicial system is the most expensive machine ever invented for finding out what happened and what to do about it.
Historically, figuring out what to do to the tax code has been almost as contentious a political issue as judicial appointments.
The idea that there aren't mistakes made constantly in the judicial system is too obvious even to need to mention.
When a court goes too far, it actually weakens our respect for judicial institutions.
We must apply a judicial rather than a political standard to the information before us [if choosing a Judge].
The judicial system is really taking an activist role in preventing Trump from implementing his agenda.
No judicial system could do society's work if each issue had to be decided afresh in every case which raised it.
I had the longest judicial vacancy in the history of the United States - on the Eastern District of North Carolina. Not many people know that.
Judicial Watch has a massive project to force states and counties across the nation to clean up their voter rolls.
South Korea is a vigorous democracy, with strong judicial institutions and a commitment to the rule of law.
Judge [Samuel] Alito, I'll tell you the same thing I told John Roberts. I expect you to adhere to the Code of Judicial Conduct.
Now that judges embrace forcibly starving someone to death, Congress should use its appropriation power to starve the judicial budget.
Historically, the judicial branch has often been the sole protector of the rights of minority groups against the will of the popular majority.
Over the years, Judicial Watch has called out many White House conflicts of interest.
Individuals because of their identity can't render an impartial judgment is just deeply offensive and contrary to all the ideals of the judicial system that we value.
The first session of the Congress of the United States under the Constitution was devoted principally to the problems of immediate revenues and administrative and judicial organization.
When justices seize authority from the other branches of the federal government, as well as state and local governments, under the rubric of judicial review, that’s tyranny.
American citizens have been killed abroad by drones with no due process, no accountability, no judicial review.
A well-functioning judicial or education system is just as much part of the wealth of a nation as its roads, ports and factories.
We've seen filibusters to block judicial nominations, jobs bills, political transparency, ending Big Oil subsidies - you name it, there's been a filibuster.
There is a danger to judicial independence when people have no understanding of how the judiciary fits into the constitutional scheme.
You can be sure that Judicial Watch is investigating and monitoring the responses of our government to the coronavirus threat.
A decision by the Supreme Court to subject Guantanamo to judicial review would eliminate these advantages.
Conservative voters increasingly understand that the one legacy a president can leave is his judicial appointments.
One is entitled to say without qualification that the correlation between prior judicial experience and fitness for the Supreme Court is zero.
An important and fundamental premise of the American judicial system is the presumption of innocence, that is until proven guilty.
Judicial review has been a part of our democracy in this constitutional government for over 200 years.
[Louis] Brandeis is often painted as an acolyte of judicial restraint, or the view that judges should uphold laws whether or not they like them.
There is hardly a political question in the United States which does not sooner or later turn into a judicial one.
When it comes to judicial nominations, President Barack Obama and Senate Democrats are fond of reminding Republicans that elections have consequences.
Unless there is a strong movement of citizens, who are the consumers of justice, we are hardly likely to see any serious judicial reforms in this country.
Without any direction from Congress, our judicial branch has unilaterally created and defined qualified immunity.
Conservatives who care about nominations of judges who practice judicial restraint are, constitutionally, restrained people themselves.
Central planning, judicial activism, and the nanny state all presume vastly more knowledge than any elite have ever possessed.
Invalidating laws has absolutely nothing to do with judicial activism. It depends on whether the law is unconstitutional or not. That's really the key point.
Nothing has yet been offered to invalidate the doctrine that the meaning of the Constitution may as well be ascertained by the Legislative as by the Judicial authority.
The standard of good behavior for the continuance in office of the judicial magistracy is certainly one of the most valuable of the modern improvements in the practice of government.
The judicial branch has, in its finest hours, stood firmly on the side of individuals against those who would trample their rights.
Legislative enactments proceed from men carrying their views a long time back; while judicial decisions are made off hand.
The Constitution is not a panacea for every blot upon the public welfare. Nor should this Court, ordained as a judicial body, be thought of as a general haven for reform movements.
In the absolute majority of western democracies - elected officials are the ones who appoint the highest bench in the judicial system. There is no reason for us to lag behind.
So the danger of conservative judicial activism has been averted for another year. Stay tuned.
My Catholic faith is the foundation of my worldview, and my judicial duty is governed, from beginning to end, by the law.
Only legislative, judicial, and executive action can completely guarantee the victory of the free world.
Judicial excellence requires candor before confirmation. We are being asked to give the nominee enormous power.
Obama and Biden want a bench crammed full of liberal judicial activists, and it's up to the American people to tell them 'no.'
The Founding Fathers built our judicial system to withstand the special interest pressures that beset the political branches of government.
Judicial review has developed since the 1970s as a way for individuals to challenge decisions taken by the State.
If there are such things as political axioms, the propriety of the judicial power of a government being co-extensive with its legislative, may be ranked among the number.
The position the Government finds itself in is not one of constructing a law, but of carrying out a decision given by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.
Judicial Watch's FOIA lawsuits have already shown the Obama State Department was corruptly targeting President Trump.
The FCC is a quasi-judicial body. It is supposed to undertake this period of public comment with a degree of seriousness and respect.
The acme of judicial distinction means the ability to look a lawyer straight in the eyes for two hours and not hear a damned word he says.
Our Parliamentary system has simply failed to meet the challenge of judicial activism.
That's the whole point of... of prosecutorial discretion in the judicial system. It's finding a just outcome in an individual case.
The public disclosure of assets by judges, though a welcome first step, is certainly not the end all of the serious problem of judicial accountability or the lack of it.
Appellate review is not a magic wand and we undermine public confidence in the judicial process when we make it look like it is.
The executive shall never exercise the legislative and judicial powers, or either of them, to the end that it may be a government of laws and not of men.
