Describe the debate over the proper role of the judiciary.

Typically, the debate over the proper role of the
judiciary centers around the issue of judicial activism and judicial restraint.  People
debate about whether judges should "make law" or simply "interpret
law."

On the one hand, there is the idea that judges should
adapt the Constitution to modern attitudes and values.  This point of view believes that
judges should do things like striking down segregation, allowing abortion, perhaps
allowing gay marriage.  These are things that are not in the Constitution but which seem
to many to be in the spirit of that document.  So, in this view, judges have to take the
spirit of the Constitution and apply it to our modern
situations.

The other side wants judges to go more strictly
by the letter of the Constitution.  Unless the Constitution explicitly says something
(allowing gay marriage, for example) the courts should not find that this is a right
that must be protected.  Instead, the courts should let the legislative branches do
whatever they want as long as their actions are not explicitly against the words of the
Constitution (as opposed to its spirit).