The article discusses the debate between judicial activism and strict interpretation of laws in the American legal system. It argues for a middle ground approach that considers the strengths and weaknesses of both legislative and judicial institutions. The key idea is that some degree of judicial activism is necessary, but it should be regulated to benefit the legal system. The essay suggests that internal constraints on judges can help regulate judicial activism, but it is crucial to prevent politicizing the judiciary and promote unity among judges. The main focus is on fostering cohesion and consensus within the judiciary to address important challenges facing the legal system today.