Why did Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. believe legislatures rather than courts should make laws?

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. advocated for judicial restraint based on the principle that, within constitutional limits, the public has the right to enact whatever laws they choose through their elected representatives.1

He believed that the creation of law is fundamentally the responsibility of legislative bodies rather than the courts. This perspective is rooted in the democratic ideal that elected officials should play the primary role in formulating policy. By deferring to the legislature, courts avoid usurping the role of democratic self-governance, ensuring that judges do not impose their own policy preferences or economic views under the guise of legal interpretation.123

This approach emphasizes that the law should reflect the felt necessities and prevailing theories of the time—a process best managed by the people's representatives—rather than being dictated by the judiciary.1