David Strauss has said judicial activism can include three things, electing that some laws are unconstitutional and stating so, changing judicial precedent, and changing the preferred interpretation of the constitution. I think all of these things are necessary to protect the rights of Americans because they seek to weed out the injustices within the system.
Judicial activism is designed to help protect individuals and give every person a right to freedom of speech. This allows for everyone to be heard and feel like they will have an opportunity to a just trial or mediation for whatever they are accused of. This is why the judicial system was designed and will continue to help people.
If and when the courts (particularly judges) begin to get power, there could be a lopsided effect that damages society as a whole. The same happens when police officers get too heavy handed. So yes, I do think that judicial activism is sometimes necessary to protect the rights of Americans.
I do not think that judicial activism is necessary to protect the rights of Americans. I think that while it can help protect some rights of American, I do not see it as being necessary. I think that the rights of American are not threated currently by the judicial system.