The Supreme Court might be considered an activist court if it

makes rulings based on the literal wording in the Constitution.

cites a number of legal precedents in its decisions.

upholds previous rulings about the constitutionality of laws.

applies an article of the Constitution to a new area of law.

applies an article of the Constitution to a new area of law.

Explanation:

Judicial activism is an attitude, or rather a choice in a specific and proactive way that the judiciary has to interpret the Constitution, often expanding its meaning and scope. Thus, the supreme court can be considered an activist court when it applies an article of the Constitution to a new area of law.

We can observe judicial activism, for example, in situations involving the Legislative Power (political class) and civil society, especially when in this relationship social demands will not be effectively met. It is clear that judicial activism is an attempt by the judiciary to have a broader and more intense participation in the realization of constitutional purposes, with greater interference in the scope of the other powers.