The People’s Court Or The Constitution’s Guardian? Judicial Populism And Its Discontents
- IJLLR Journal
- Sep 20
- 1 min read
Kanishka Rajeev Singh, B.A.LL.B., Babu Banarasi Das University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh
ABSTRACT
This conspectus examines the emergence of judicial populism in India, where courts increasingly align themselves with dominant public sentiments and political narratives, frequently at the expense of constitutional allegiance. Through doctrinal analysis and comparative reflection, it explores how landmark judgments– such as the Ayodhya verdict and the same-sex marriage verdict– reveal a shift in judicial reasoning marked by performative adjudication, populist mimicry, and strategic silence. These decisions raise critical questions about the counter-majoritarian role of the judiciary and its allegiance to constitutional morality. Comparative references to Brazil, Poland, and the United Kingdom show divergent judicial responses to populist pressures, offering lessons in institutional resilience and rhetorical restraint. The study introduces a conceptual lexicon to frame the normative tensions between legality and legitimacy, sentiment and structure. It argues that judicial populism, whether expressed through affirmation or abstention, risks transforming courts into instruments of majoritarian validation rather than guardians of constitutional principles.
Keywords: judicial populism, constitutional morality, performative adjudication, public sentiment, counter-majoritarianism, judicial tempo
