Judges that rule against elected officials in order to make rules that emphasize equality and personal liberty are said to be engaging in?

Judges that rule against elected officials to emphasize equality and personal liberty are said to be engaging in judicial activism. This approach often involves interpreting the law in a way that promotes social change and protects individual rights, even if it means overturning the decisions of democratically elected representatives. Critics argue that this can undermine the democratic process, while supporters believe it is essential for safeguarding fundamental freedoms.