Judicial activism refers to the practice where judges interpret laws and the Constitution in a way that reflects their personal views or social considerations, rather than strictly adhering to the original intent of the law. This approach often leads to decisions that can expand or change legal interpretations, impacting various areas such as civil rights and social justice. Supporters of judicial activism argue that it allows the judiciary to address contemporary issues and protect individual rights, especially when legislative bodies may be slow to act. Critics, however, contend that it undermines the separation of powers by allowing judges to make policy decisions, which should be the role of elected officials like Congress.