One issue that seems to come up a lot, especially in criminal law, is what a court should do when it catches the legislative branch with its pants down. There seem to be two schools of thought: (1) Bend the rule of law a little and pull up the legislature's pants (see, for example, Commonwealth v. Mochan, 110 A.2d 788; or Barber v. Superior Court, 195 Cal.Rptr. 484), or (2) uphold the rule of law while also removing the legislature's drawers (see, arguably, State v. Nations, 676 S.W.2d 282; or Keeler v. Superior Court, 470 P.2d 617). Is this what people mean when they talk about the debate over judicial activism?