Which term is a legal instrument that can compel government action or prohibit specific actions, commonly issued by courts?

• A. Summary judgment
• B. Writ
• C. Habeas corpus
• D. Ex post facto law

Answer: (B)

Writs are formal court orders that direct someone, often a government official or a lower court, to do something or to refrain from doing something. This makes them a flexible tool for enforcing legal duties or stopping actions that exceed authority. For example, a writ of mandamus can force a government agency to perform a duty it’s legally obligated to carry out, while a writ of prohibition can bar a lower court or official from taking or continuing an action that falls outside legal authority. Because writs are issued by courts and are specifically about compelling or prohibiting action, they fit the description in the question.

Other terms don’t fit as well. A summary judgment is a court decision resolving a case without a trial, not a directive intended to push or stop government action. Habeas corpus is a writ used to challenge unlawful detention—a remedy focused on releasing someone from custody rather than broadly compelling or prohibiting government actions. An ex post facto law is a principle that prohibits applying new laws retroactively; it’s a constitutional rule, not a writ issued by a court.