What I hear described as judicial activism is when a court in its ruling creates a law that the legislature would not pass. That's different from restoring a the status quo by removing a new law.
This. It's finding new "rights" that weren't in the constitution before the judge ruled that they have a problem with.
They love activist courts, big government, all that, when it goes for their side.
And Democrats dislike activist courts and big government when it goes against their side. Welcome to reality! People don't like it when laws they want passed aren't passed. If both sides are angry that generally means the courts are doing their job and not sailing with the political winds.
