In the context of court rulings, judicial activism refers to the practice of judges making rulings based on personal or political considerations rather than strictly interpreting the law or adhering to precedent. This approach often leads to significant changes in public policy, as judges may expand or protect rights that are not explicitly outlined in the constitution. Proponents argue that judicial activism is necessary to ensure justice and adapt laws to contemporary society, while critics claim it undermines the rule of law and encroaches on the powers of the legislative branch.