Judicial Activism vs. Judicial Moderation Judicial activism and judicial moderation are two opposing philosophies when it comes to Supreme Court Justices' interpretations of the United States Constitution; judges appointed by the President to the Supreme Court serve for life, and thus whose decisions shape the lives of “We, the People” for a long time to come. Marbury v. Madison, one of the first Supreme Court cases affirming the power of judicial review, is an effective argument in favor of this power; however, there is a lack of direct textual basis for the decision. John Marshall got away with silence on many issues and vague wording in the Constitution. Marshall was also the first to interpret the Constitution loosely, also known as judicial activism. During his tenure as Chief Justice, Marshall also succeeded in loose constructionism through other landmark Supreme Court cases such as Gibbons v. Ogden ("Commerce Emancipation Proclamation") and McCulloch v. Maryland (whose decision stated that states cannot tax a faith...