Party Platforms

What do the parties believe?

  • Vision

    The role of the judiciary is to protect individual freedoms and oppose other branches if they infringe on those freedoms.

  • Compassion

    The role of the judiciary is to preserve social morality, practically engaging with other branches when it believes they prevent the most just application of the Constitution. 

  • Perseverance

    The role of the judiciary is to preserve the original language of the Constitution, showing restraint by never interfering with other branches unless they directly violate that language.

The 2025 Elections Topic:

The Role of the Supreme Court

The role of the Supreme Court in American governance has long been debated, particularly regarding the balance of power between the judiciary, the executive, and the legislature. While the Court serves as the ultimate interpreter of the Constitution, its authority has grown over time through Judicial Review, raising questions about whether it has become too powerful. Some argue that the judiciary should exercise restraint, deferring to elected representatives in Congress and the presidency. Others believe the Court must actively check government overreach and ensure that laws align with constitutional principles, even if that means overturning acts of the legislative or executive branches. Additionally, debates persist over judicial appointments, lifetime tenure, and whether the Court should evolve with societal changes or adhere strictly to originalist interpretations. The question at hand is: Should the Supreme Court have broad authority to strike down laws and executive actions, or should its power be more limited in deference to the elected branches of government?

Where do the parties stand?

PERSEVERANCE PARTY: TRADITIONALISM 

The Perseverance Party sees the judiciary as a body that should strictly adhere to the Founding Fathers’ original intent of the Constitution. The original language of the constitution needs to be paramount, even in the face of changing circumstances, cultural context, or morality. They reject judicial activism and believe that courts should not create new rights or interpret the Constitution in ways that deviate from the framers’ vision. Instead, judges should act as defenders of natural law, preserving the cultural foundations of Western civilization. An overly powerful judiciary threatens states’ rights, the organic development of legal traditions, leading to the erosion of national identity and moral order.

VISION PARTY: NON-INTERVENTIONISM  

The Vision Party views the Court as a means of protecting individual freedoms, and therefore its approach to judicial power focuses on how the Court can relate to individual lives. They generally side with the original writing of the Constitution (originalism) but are willing to engage with the actions of other branches if individual liberties are seen to be at stake. In their view, the courts should serve as a check on both federal and state power, ensuring that government intervention remains minimal on individual issues such as speech, property rights, and other personal freedoms are upheld. Based on the framework, the party would not want the courts to intervene on issues that do not have a clear individual impact, such as wartime decisions or widespread federal regulations.

COMPASSION: ENLIGHTENED LIBERTY

The Compassion Party affirms the Constitution as the supreme law of the land, but also acknowledges the historical reality of the Court’s role in addressing key moral shortcomings in the government’s application of that law. The party argues that moral interpretation of the Constitution is as important as the legal one. They see the court as an essential protector of the social morality. Therefore, the party believes courts should take a more proactive role in checking state power, especially when legislatures fail to uphold fundamental freedoms or use historical precedent to disproportionately harm certain groups of people. Judges should not merely apply the law but also act as a counterbalance to the state, using their personal discernment to identify unjust  or unconstitutional laws.

Guidelines For Candidates

Why this Campaign Issue?

The judicial branch holds immense influence over American law and society. Unlike other branches, the Supreme Court is unelected and serves for life, raising critical questions about accountability, the separation of powers, and the proper limits of judicial authority. As candidates present differing views on the Court’s role—whether it should exercise restraint, defend individual liberties, or protect the law’s moral integrity—voters are encouraged to evaluate the balance of power within the federal government. Keep in mind, the stance we take on judicial power doesn’t just apply to the Supreme Court; voters should consider carefully the implications of each perspective on state, local, and federal courts. This discussion empowers citizens to engage thoughtfully in debates on constitutional interpretation, ensuring that American democracy remains both just and representative.

How to research this Campaign Issue

As candidates and voters prepare to engage in conversations about this topic, we encourage everyone to maintain a spirit of grace, humility, and truth. Ideas have consequences. The ideas of today will be the policies of tomorrow. The role of the judiciary is one of the most debated aspects of American government, with decisions that have shaped the nation for generations. In preparing for the election, we encourage candidates to research the biblical role of government and consider the proper limits of judicial authority. What does Scripture say about justice, authority, and the role of judges? How have different governmental structures throughout history affected human flourishing? In particular, we encourage candidates to look at instances of Judicial Review throughout American history, evaluating both the positive and negative consequences of Supreme Court decisions.

For example, Brown v. Board of Education played a key role in dismantling racial segregation, aligning with biblical principles of justice and equality, while toeing the line of judicial activism, while Dred Scott v. Sandford, arguably a case of judicial restraint, entrenched the evil of chattel slavery and deepened national division. By examining these landmark cases, candidates can engage in a thoughtful discussion about the responsibility of the judiciary in upholding justice, while recognizing the need for limitations to prevent overreach. Through this, we can approach governance in a way that aligns with both biblical truth and the best principles of human flourishing.

In addition to engaging with voters on these issues, presidential tickets will additionally need to prepare for a more in-depth application of their party’s stance in press releases, open forums, and debates. This is a very challenging issue, and candidates will need to understand it in significant depth to be successful in the later stages of the Presidential Race. To facilitate their success this campaign cycle, candidates should keep the following in mind:

  • Master Key Terms: Candidates should clearly understand terms such as judicial restraint, judicial activism, judicial review, originalism, living constitutionalism, pragmatism, etc.  and be able to articulate their thoughts on them in simple, clear, and direct terms. Handling the core concepts of the issue will demonstrate intellectual diligence and trustworthiness to voters.

  • Adhere to your party’s stance, even if you disagree with it: While taking a personal and nuanced stance to these issues is important, candidates should be seeking a position that’s clearly consistent with their registered party and clearly opposed to other party stances. This is an essential way National Convention elections build leadership and critical thinking skills.

  • Understand the stances of all parties: Each of the party stances contain clear strengths and glaring problems. Rather than avoiding other parties’ strengths or ignoring your own position’s issues, successful candidates will be prepared to clearly justify why their party's position is the best available option in light of these strengths and flaws.

  • Do your research: The best way to prepare an excellent party stance is to understand which court cases support your/others’ conclusions, and which ones strike at the heart of your/others’ weaknesses. You can also supplement these decisions themselves with any commentary that helps you understand them. Be careful to avoid viewing these decisions through a personal lens (“do these decisions align with my opinion/values?”) but instead approach them from how they affect your argument (“what do these decisions imply about my argument?”). Below are some potential cases to kickstart your research:


When researching the role of the judiciary and its vast power and decision making apparatuses and forming viewpoints and opinions, it's important for candidates to reference and utilize reliable sources. As you research, do your best to stick to these general guidelines:


  • First-degree sources are the most reliable and the original source of information or data. These include government databases (FRED, US Dept. of Educ.) and peer-reviewed academic journals. 

  • Second-degree sources are also reliable and based on first-degree or easily-verifiable information. These include historically credible newspapers (New York Times, Washington Post, WORLD News Group), or other similarly vetted media. 

  • Third-degree sources make up most other forms of media. While they can be useful, they require more explicit verification. When in doubt, consider the credibility of the sources these media cite. Generally, if media has cryptic, unreliable, or missing sources, it is best to avoid using them.

  • Use of Generative AI is encouraged in research but prohibited in all campaign material. AI is a wonderful tool for compiling sources and summarizing information, but it often makes mistakes. Therefore, the best use of AI for your campaign is to use AI internet search features (such as what’s seen on ChatGPT or Perplexity) to help you find more reliable sources faster. Remember that AI is a research tool, NOT a writing tool. You are expected to prepare all of your press releases, debate statements, etc. in your own words. The National Convention Elections team will not accept any documents written by/with the help of generative AI. 


Thank you for participating in this aspect of TeenPact Elections! We’re excited to hear your insights, and are convinced each of you will display your leadership and spiritual maturity in this exciting process!   


Your Vote.Your Voice.