Supreme court justices who support judicial activism and those who support judicial restraint most disagree on the answer to which question?
a. should the supreme court rule on cases that have already been heard by lower courts?
b. how should new justices be selected for the supreme court in the event of a vacancy? c. to what extent should the supreme court work to promote social progress?
d. what is the value of concurring opinions that agree with a majority opinion?

The correct answer is C. Supreme Court justices who support judicial activism and those who support judicial restraint most disagree on the extent the Supreme Court should work to promote social progress, since the justices that support judicial activism seek to contribute to social progress through their decisions, while the justices who support judicial restraint believe that their decisions should not exceed the legally established framework for their performance, and that social policies should be carried out by the executive branch.

this is a good question! i'll do some research and come back when i have the answer!