History
Judicial Restraint in Constitutional Interpretation
Quick fact
In 1937, after President Franklin Roosevelt threatened to 'pack' the Supreme Court, the Court's 'switch in time that saved nine' saw justices begin deferring to New Deal legislation, a dramatic illustration of how judicial restraint can reshape a nation's constitutional course.
Why this is interesting
You've likely heard that judges 'interpret' the Constitution, but what if they should sometimes just step back and accept what Congress does? Why would a judge ever vote to uphold a law they personally think is wrong?