Do what is right and let the law catch up?
Ultimately, whether to "do what is right and let the law catch up" is a personal decision that each individual must make for themselves, taking into account their own moral principles, the specific situation at hand, and the potential consequences of their actions.
What is a phrase?Generally, The phrase "do what is right and let the law catch up" suggests that there may be situations where the law has not yet caught up to what is morally or ethically right, and that in such cases, individuals should act based on their conscience and sense of morality rather than solely following the law.
While it is important to respect and abide by the law, it is also important to recognize that the law is not always perfect or infallible. There may be times when the law is unjust or does not adequately address certain issues, and in such cases, individuals may have a moral obligation to act in a way that aligns with their own ethical principles, even if it means breaking the law.
However, it is also important to recognize that breaking the law can have serious consequences, both legally and personally. It is important to carefully consider the potential consequences of one's actions and to be prepared to accept the legal and personal repercussions that may result.
Read more about phrase
https://brainly.com/question/15806900
#SPJ1
What does civil liability mean for sellers or servers of alcohol?
In the context of injuries caused by them, licensees and their sellers may be held civilly liable.
In civil cases, bars, restaurants, and other establishments with a license to sell and/or serve alcohol may be held accountable for doing so unlawfully. The relevant legislation, also referred to as "dram shop laws," differ from state to state, sometimes dramatically.
Anybody who violates any of the terms of Sections 4 and 6 or any Central Government order made thereunder is subject to a sentence of up to six months in jail, a fine of up to $1,000, both, or both. If the violation is persisted, a further fine may also be imposed.
To know more about civil liability mean refer to:
https://brainly.com/question/16679204
what governmental body would make the determination?
The determination would be made by the relevant government agency or department depending on the issue.
Depending on the situation, the decision would be taken by the pertinent government department or agency. For example, if the issue involves environmental regulations, it would be the Environmental Protection Agency. If it involves taxes, it would be the Treasury Department.
If it involves immigration, it would be the Department of Homeland Security. This department is responsible for the enforcement of federal immigration laws, as well as the protection of the country from potential threats posed by foreign nationals.
It also oversees the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), which is responsible for processing immigration applications and managing the nation’s legal immigration system.
To learn more about government agency link is here
brainly.com/question/14366774
#SPJ4
the power that the supreme court has to determine if a law or act is constitutional is called
Judicial review is the power that is possessed by the supreme court to be able to determine if a certain law or an act is constitutional.
Judicial review is basically the power which is possessed by the courts of a particular country to be able to examine the actions of the executive, legislative, as well as the administrative arms of the government and also to be able to determine whether such acts are consistent and in accordance with the constitution of the country.
Actions which are judged inconsistent with the constitution are then declared unconstitutional and, therefore such actions are null and void. The institution of judicial review in this sense basically depends upon the existence of a written constitution of the country.
To know more about Judicial review
https://brainly.com/question/966716
#SPJ4
what article in the declaration would be violated
The right to freedom of speech, as stated in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, would be violated if a person's right to speak freely were restricted or suppressed.
A person's right to speak freely would be violated if it were curtailed or suppressed, according to Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
This right allows people to express themselves without fear of retribution or censorship, and is necessary for a healthy democracy. Freedom of speech can be limited in certain circumstances, such as when hate speech is used to incite violence or when someone's speech is considered to be a threat to national security.
To learn more about Universal Declaration link is here
brainly.com/question/8552788
#SPJ4
______ elections tend to have the lowest voter turnout.a. Localb. Statec. Nationald. International
The local elections tend to have the lowest voter turnout. The correct option is option a.
Voter turnout basically refers to the percentage or the number of the eligible voters who can cast their ballots. A high voter turnout is basically considered to be indicative of the vitality of a particular democracy, whereas a low voter turnout is usually associated with voter apathy as well as a mistrust among the people for the political process.
The voter turnout for a local election is going to be the lowest when compared to voting at a state, national or international level.
Hence, the correct option is option a.
To know more about voter turnout
https://brainly.com/question/1270103
#SPJ4
what milwaukee police detective charged with misconduct?
Officers Donald Krueger and Marco Lopez each face crime charges for their misconduct— or lack of actions — superior until the end of life of 20-period-old Keishon Thomas last old age.
Krueger is responsible for having done abuse of one held physically held by force. Lopez is attack offense honestly office for making a false record. A Milwaukee police agent has been attacking in misdemeanor honestly office subsequently supposedly augmenting facts about a domestic intensity study to the suspect – her 22-old age-old offspring.
The criminal discontent still alleges that Detective Freedom Mustafa tried to persuade the martyr not to chase charges against her offspring and helped him contact the martyr straightforwardly while he was secured from achievement so.
To know more about police refer to: https://brainly.com/question/29687529
#SPJ4
which of the following situations is not one of the six situations in which a warrantless search is valid?
Therefore, a situation that is not one of the six is likely to involve a circumstance that does not fall under any of the above categories.
What is a warrantless search?Generally, A warrantless search is a search conducted by law enforcement without the need for a valid search warrant. The power of a warrantless search is usually based on the concept of implied or apparent consent, or on the existence of exigent circumstances. Examples of warrantless searches include searches incident to arrest, searches of items in plain view, and emergency searches.
speaking, the six situations in which a warrantless search might be considered valid are:
Incident to a lawful arrestStop and friskPlain viewConsentAutomobile searchesEmergency searchesRead more about warrantless search
https://brainly.com/question/140436
#SPJ1
whata state of balance between cooperation and conflict is?
The state of balance between cooperation and conflict is a dynamic equilibrium that involves managing tensions between actors to prevent escalation or breakdown in relations.
The state of balance between cooperation and conflict refers to the delicate balance between cooperative and conflicting forces that exist between actors such as states, organizations, and individuals. This balance is characterized by a constant interplay between cooperative actions, such as negotiation and collaboration, and conflicting actions, such as competition and aggression. Maintaining this balance requires managing tensions between actors to prevent escalation or breakdown in relations.
The state of balance between cooperation and conflict is essential for promoting peaceful and stable relations between actors in various contexts, including international relations, business, and interpersonal relationships. When the balance between cooperation and conflict is disrupted, it can lead to a breakdown in relations, conflict escalation, or even violence. Therefore, understanding the dynamics of this balance and developing effective mechanisms for managing tensions is crucial for maintaining stable and constructive relations between actors.
learn more about cooperation at :
https://brainly.com/question/9902152
#SPJ4
When the host country's national anthem is played when you are visiting a foreign port, you should take what action?
When the host country's national anthem is played while visiting a foreign port, it is customary and respectful to stand at attention and be silent during the playing of the anthem.
If you are in a group, it is also appropriate to face the direction of the flag or the location of the music source, and to stand with your feet together and your hands by your sides. Men should remove their hats as a sign of respect.
It is important to note that customs and etiquette may vary across different countries, so it is always a good idea to research and familiarize yourself with the cultural norms of the country you are visiting to ensure that you are behaving respectfully and appropriately.
To know more about cultural norms here
https://brainly.com/question/12425056
#SPJ4
Who discovered the Law of Elemental Transfiguration?
It appears that Gamp's Law of Elemental Transfiguration makes use of the discoverer's last name. It's possible that Hesper Gamp, a witch who is married to Sirius Black II, is that person or one of their kin.
A rule that controls the magical universe is known as Gamp's Law of Elemental Transfiguration. Food is the only one of Gamp's Law's five Principle Exceptions that is specifically mentioned, however, there are a number of potential contenders for the other four.
It may or may not be feasible to transform an animal into a person, according to W.O.M.B.A.T.
It should be emphasized that although food cannot be made straight from anything, it can be increased, multiplied, or summoned if the summoner knows the general area and is reasonably certain the food will still be there.
Hermione responded that this was impossible because food is one of the five Principle Exemptions to this law in September 1997 after Ron said that his mother could create delicious food out of thin air. This only enraged Ron, who demanded that she "speak English" and was unsatisfied with her response.
To know more about Elemental Transfiguration, click below:
https://brainly.com/question/30715702
#SPJ4
The lex mercatoria was an unbiased system of rules for deciding _______ disputes across borders and political boundaries.
commercial
capacity
bussiness
product
The lex mercatoria was an unbiased system of rules for deciding commercial disputes across borders and political boundaries.
The corpus of commercial law utilised by merchants across mediaeval Europe was called lex mercatoria, or "merchant law," often known as "the Law Merchant" in English.
It developed as a body of custom and accepted practises, much like English common law, and was upheld by a network of merchant courts situated along the major trade routes. It evolved into a comprehensive body of law that was created, decided, and upheld freely, reducing conflict resulting from the members' varied backgrounds and regional customs.
Local state law was not always relevant due to the international context, and merchant law gave a standardised framework to conduct transactions, minimising the need for a third party to be trusted.
It highlighted contractual flexibility and the non-transferability of property, while eschewing legal minutiae and making decisions ex aequo et bono. Professional traders resurrected Europe's nearly nonexistent economic operations, which had collapsed with the fall of the Roman Empire, with the lex mercatoria.
To learn more about Lex mercatoria follow link; https://brainly.com/question/30755370
#SPJ4
which system only allows members of a ruling elite to govern? A. Oligarchy B. Monarchy C. Patriarchy
The system that only allows members of a ruling elite to govern is called an oligarchy.
Hence, the correct option is A.
In an oligarchy, a small group of people hold power and make decisions for the society or organization. This group may be based on wealth, military power, social status, or other factors, but the key characteristic is that it is a select group of individuals who have control over the governing process.
Monarchy refers to a system in which a single person, usually a king or queen, holds power.
Patriarchy refers to a system in which men hold more power and authority than women.
To know more about members here:
https://brainly.com/question/2407649
#SPJ4
which statement about trends in texas government spending is best supported by the information presented in the following figure?
“Spending by the state has been more or less steady since the 2008-09 biennium” is the statement about trends in Texas government spending is best supported by the information presented in the following figure.
What do you mean by Government Spending?Government expenditure is the amount of money allocated by the public sector for the purchase of products and the delivery of services, such as defense, social protection, healthcare, and education.
The state receives more than $250 billion in income each year through more than 60 various taxes, fees, and levies. The majority of the money is spent on things like road building, professional licenses, jails, and university research.
Public welfare ($1,512) and elementary and secondary education ($2,179) were Texas's two highest per-capita expenditure categories. The majority of Medicaid funding is classified by the Census Bureau as part of public welfare, although some of it is also given to public hospitals.
Therefore, spending by the state has been more or less steady since the 2008-09 biennium.
Learn more about Government Spending, here;
https://brainly.com/question/474561
#SPJ1
which is the best description of how strict constructionists thought a liberal constructionist view would affect the nation?
The best depiction of how severe constructionists thought a liberal constructionist was the states' powers would be restricted and weakened.
As indicated by Hamilton, Liberal Constructionists felt that the public authority should be "a vivacious government." They upheld a sizable government, which significantly frightened the severe constructionists.
The Severe Constructionists, who upheld the Counter-Federalist position, were driven by Thomas Jefferson. As indicated by liberal constructionists, the Constitution's importance and goal ought to be reasoned by considering the entire thing. Then again, the individuals who comply with severe constructionism read the Constitution in a real sense and treat it as regulation.
Learn more about liberal constructionist:
https://brainly.com/question/14753004
#SPJ4
Who were the 3 Supreme Court justices?
In 2020, the United States Supreme Court was composed of nine justices. The three justices who garnered significant attention that year were Chief Justice John Roberts, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, and Associate Justice Samuel Alito.
John Roberts, who was appointed by President George W. Bush in 2005, is the current Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Roberts is often seen as a swing vote on the court, meaning he has the ability to decide cases that are closely divided among the other justices.
Clarence Thomas was appointed by President George H.W. Bush in 1991 and is the longest-serving member of the current court. Thomas is known for his conservative views and originalist interpretation of the Constitution.
Samuel Alito was appointed by President George W. Bush in 2006 and is also considered a conservative justice. Alito is known for his strong views on individual rights, free speech, and the Second Amendment.
Complete question:
Who were the 3 Supreme Court justices in 2020 in the united states?
To learn more about Supreme Court
https://brainly.com/question/12848156
#SPJ4
which part of the united states constitution protects the general right to privacy? choose the best answer.
The Fourth Amendment
Second amendment
Third amendment
The United States Constitution Fourth Amendment safeguards everyone's right to privacy. The correct answer is option(a).
The Fourth Amendment protects the right of solitude against extravagant searches and seizures for one management. The Fifth Amendment supports the right against self-accusation, which justifies the care of private news.
The Constitution, through the Fourth Amendment, protects crowds from senseless searches and seizures for one management. The Fourth Amendment, still, is not a guarantee against all searches and seizures, but only those that are regarded extravagant under the regulation.
To know more about Fourth Amendment refer to: https://brainly.com/question/29791299
#SPJ4
summary jury trials are primarily used in federal courts but have occasionally been used in state courts when there are complex issues to be litigated. true or false?
True, summary jury trials are mostly used in federal courts, but they have been used in state courts on occasion when complex issues are at stake.
The procedure is not legally binding. Summary jury trials, on the other hand, generally promote dispute resolution. Summary jury trials are typically used in cases that are resistant to other pretrial settlement methods and are sufficiently complex to necessitate a lengthy full trial. More than substantive legal issues, the dynamics of the controversy determine whether or not cases are appropriate for summary jury trials. Normally, the decision to send a case to summary jury trial is made at the final pretrial conference, when plans for summary trial procedures are made. The format of a summary trial is similar to that of a traditional civil jury trial.
To learn more about jury trial:
https://brainly.com/question/12085109
#SPJ4
When parties to a dispute work out a solution for themselves without recourse to outside help or the courts, they have resolved the dispute through
a. Arbitration
b. Mediation
c. Negotiation
d. Novation
When parties to a dispute work out a solution for themselves without recourse to outside help or the courts, they have resolved the dispute through Negotiation. The correct option is C.
The process of settling disagreements between parties is referred to as dispute resolution or dispute settlement. Sometimes, the terms "conflict resolution" and "dispute resolution" are used synonymously.
It is also common for states to create their own arbitration tribunals to resolve conflicts. The International Court of Arbitration and the London Court of International Arbitration are renowned private international courts that resolve disputes between commercial private companies.
To know more about Tribunals, click here:
https://brainly.com/question/13843175
#SPJ4
who is responsible for perimeter control at a terrorism incident?
Option d. Law enforcement personnel is responsible for perimeter control at a terrorism incident.
In its broadest sense, terrorism is the intentional use of violence and fear to further political or ideological objectives. When used in this context, the phrase primarily refers to intentional acts of violence committed against non-combatants (typically civilians and members of the armed forces acting in a neutral capacity) in both peacetime and wartime.
The terms "terrorist" and "terrorism," which date back to the in history as of late 18th century French Revolution, were widely used internationally during the Troubles in Northern Ireland, the Basque conflict, and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the 1970s. This increase in sui-cide attacks since the 1980s is best further exemplified by the September 11 attacks in the United States in 2001.
To learn more about terrorism: https://brainly.com/question/9450062
#SPJ4
Note that the full question is:
Who is responsible for perimeter control at a terrorism incident?
a. EMS personnel
b. Fire department personnel
c. FEMA personnel
d. Law enforcement personnel
which constitutional factors affect the way the budget is made in texas
Several constitutional factors affect the way the budget is made in Texas are Biennial budgeting, Separation of powers, Revenue limitations, Rainy Day Fund, Debt limitation, etc.
Here are some of the key factors:
1. Biennial budgeting: The Texas Constitution requires the state legislature to pass a balanced budget every two years. This means that the budget must cover a two-year period, known as a biennium.
2. Separation of powers: The Texas Constitution divides power between three branches of government: the legislative, executive, and judicial branches. The legislature is responsible for passing the budget, while the governor has the power to veto or line-item veto portions of the budget. The judicial branch can also weigh in on budget-related matters.
3. Revenue limitations: The Texas Constitution limits the amount of revenue that the state can collect and spend.
The constitution also requires that any new taxes or fees be approved by a two-thirds majority in both the House of Representatives and the Senate.
4. Rainy Day Fund: The Texas Constitution established the Economic Stabilization Fund, also known as the Rainy-Day Fund, which is a savings account that can be used to fund emergency expenses or to address revenue shortfalls.
5. Debt limitations: The Texas Constitution sets limits on the amount of debt that the state can incur.
This means that the state must balance its budget and cannot rely on borrowing to fund ongoing expenses.
All of these constitutional factors can affect the way that the budget is made in Texas, as well as the priorities that are reflected in the budget.
For example, the biennial budgeting requirement may make it more difficult to address long-term issues or to respond quickly to unexpected events, while revenue limitations may make it difficult to fund new initiatives or expand existing programs.
To know more about budget is made in Texas here:
https://brainly.com/question/24203012
#SPJ4
Which of the following powers is NOT explicitly given to Congress by the Constitution? a. the power to impeach the President b. the power to regulate commerce among the states c. the power to extradite a person accused of a crime from one state to another d. the power
The power to impeach the President is not explicitly given to Congress under the Constitution.
The correct option is A.
According to the Constitution, Congress has the power to oust the President, Vice President, and all federal civil servants for treason, bribery, or other serious offences.
This technique was brought over from English practice, where Parliament impeached and found guilty ministers and Crown favorites in an effort to check the Monarch's power.
The Framers of the Constitution understood the impeachment power of Congress as a critical instrument for holding government officials accountable for legal infractions and abuses of power.
It serves as a significant check on the Executive and Judicial Branches.
All federal are liable to removal via impeachment, but the President and federal judges have been the targets of most notable use of the instrument by Congress.
To know more about the impeachment process, click here:
https://brainly.com/question/11542266
#SPJ4
The question is incomplete. The complete question is:
Which of the following powers is NOT explicitly given to Congress by the Constitution?
a. the power to impeach the president
b. the power to regulate commerce among the states
c. the power to extradite a person accused of a crime from one state to another
d. the power to confirm the president's nominee to fill a vacancy in the vice-presidency
how long must a commissioner maintain a complete record for every license in arkansas for
According to the Arkansas Administrative Procedure Act (APA), a commissioner must maintain a complete record for every license issued for at least five years after the license expires or is revoked.
This requirement is outlined in section 25-15-209 of the APA, which states that "Every agency shall maintain a complete record of all licenses issued by it, which record shall be kept for at least five (5) years after the expiration, suspension, or revocation of each license."
This requirement ensures that there is a record of all licenses issued by the commissioner and provides a means for the commissioner to track the status of licenses over time. It also allows for transparency and accountability in the licensing process, as the records can be used to track any changes or issues that may arise with a particular license or licensee.
The proper question is " how long must a commissioner maintain a complete record for every license in arkansas for?"
To know more about Arkansas here
https://brainly.com/question/28013606
#SPJ4
Who plays the largest role in interpreting the Bill of Rights?
The Supreme Court plays the largest role in interpreting the Bill of Rights. As the highest court in the United States, the Supreme Court is responsible for interpreting the Constitution, including the Bill of Rights, to determine the scope of its protections.
The Supreme Court has the final say in reviewing and overturning decisions made by subordinate courts that establish the boundaries of the Bill of Rights.
As a result, the Supreme Court is essential to ensuring that the Bill of Rights' protections are upheld in their entirety. The Bill of Rights has been used by the Supreme Court to defend a number of civil freedoms, such as the right to keep and bear weapons, the freedom of speech, and the prohibition against unjustified searches and seizures.
The Bill of Rights has also been utilised by the Supreme Court to find invalid actions enacted by Congress or state legislatures that infringed on those rights.
To learn more about Constitution visit:
https://brainly.com/question/15004627
#SPJ4
For purposes of diversity jurisdiction, a corporation is considered to be a citizen of:
A.Every state in which it is incorporated and the one state in which it has its principal place of business
B.The first state in which it was incorporated and every state in which it does substantial business
C.The first state in which it was incorporated and the one state in which it has its principal place of business
D.Every state in which it is incorporated and every state in which it does substantial business
A corporation is regarded as a citizen of each state in which it was incorporated as well as the state that serves as its primary place of business for the purposes of diverse jurisdiction. As a result, a business is allowed to have citizenship in two or more states for diversity-related reasons.
What is Citizenship?A citizen and a country have a legal tie when they are citizens. Typically, the nation is the one where a person was born, resides, supports, and receives protection. Normally, a person is a citizen of the nation in which they were born, but occasionally, a person will seek for naturalisation in order to become citizen of another nation. There are nations that permit dual citizenship and nations that do not. Jus soli, or right of soil, entitles people who are born in the nation to citizenship. Individuals with foreign parents may be citizens by naturalisation. Jus sanguinis, the right of citizenship for members of the national diaspora, is also recognised by some nations. Jus sanguinis, which translates to "right of blood," is a Latin term.
To know more about Citizenship visit:
https://brainly.com/question/11052165
#SPJ1
Pretend you are a police officer who just witnessed your partner shoot and kill a serial killer after the suspect had given up his fight by dropping his handgun to the floor at your partner’s order. Your partner claimed that he shot the suspect while the suspect was still holding up his gun, but you saw it differently.
There were no other witnesses. What would you do and why?
Answer:
As a police officer who just witnessed my partner shoot and kill a serial killer, I would feel conflicted and concerned about what I had observed. It would be my duty to report my observations to my superiors and to the relevant investigative authorities, even if it meant challenging the actions of my fellow officer. Upholding the law and ensuring that justice is served is paramount in such situations.
Explanation:
As a police officer who just witnessed my partner shoot and kill a serial killer, I would have to act according to my duty to serve and protect the public and uphold the law. If I saw it differently than my partner's version of events, I would need to report my observations to my superiors and to the relevant investigative authorities, such as internal affairs or the district attorney's office.
I would do this because it is important to ensure that the truth is uncovered and justice is served, even if it means reporting on a fellow officer. I would also want to ensure that the proper protocols and procedures were followed during the incident and that the use of force was justified and appropriate. Ultimately, my responsibility as a police officer is to serve and protect the public and uphold the law, even if it means challenging the actions of my fellow officers.
A developer and an investor had been in the real estate business for many years. Because of their long-standing relationship, the developer and the investor, neither of whom was an attorney, often dispensed with certain legal formalities when dealing with each other, thus saving the costs of lawyers' fees and other attendant expenses. The investor owned a parcel of land that the developer was interested in. At lunch one day, the developer offered to buy the parcel from the investor for $50,000. The investor accepted the developer's offer, and the parties agreed on June 15 as the closing date. The developer wrote out and handed the investor a check for $2,500 with "earnest money" written in the memo, and they shook hands on their deal. A few weeks before closing, the developer called the investor and told him she had changed her mind about purchasing the land because of a sudden economic downturn in the area. The investor appeared at the developer's office on June 15 with the deed to the land in his hand. The developer refused to tender the balance due, and the investor sued the developer for specific performance. Will the investor prevail? (A) No, because the agreement does not comply with the Statute of Frauds and is, therefore, unenforceable. (B) No, but the court will allow the investor to keep the $2,500 earnest money as damages. (C) Yes, because the $2,500 payment constituted part performance of the contract. (D) Yes, because the developer and the investor had established a course of dealing.
Answer:
Based on the given facts, the correct answer is (B) No, but the court will allow the investor to keep the $2,500 earnest money as damages.
Explanation:
The agreement between the developer and the investor to sell the land was a contract, which was formed when the developer made an offer to purchase the land and the investor accepted it. The fact that the parties did not use attorneys or put the agreement in writing does not necessarily make the agreement unenforceable. However, the agreement does not comply with the Statute of Frauds, which requires certain contracts, including contracts for the sale of land, to be in writing in order to be enforceable.
The payment of $2,500 by the developer to the investor constitutes earnest money, which is a deposit made by a buyer to show good faith and to bind the contract. If the developer breaches the contract, the investor is entitled to keep the earnest money as liquidated damages. However, the investor cannot force the developer to purchase the land or to perform the contract because specific performance is an equitable remedy, and the court will not compel the developer to perform the contract when the contract is unenforceable due to the Statute of Frauds.
Therefore, the correct answer is (B) No, but the court will allow the investor to keep the $2,500 earnest money as damages.
The framers of the Constitution intended the Supreme Court to be politically insulated. Despite this intent, the Supreme Court is not completely insulated from political influences.(a) Describe one constitutional provision that seeks to insulate the Supreme Court from public opinion.One point is earned for a description of a constitutional provision that seeks to insulate the Supreme Court from public opinion.• Justices serve for life.• Justices are appointed/not elected.• Justices' salaries cannot be reduced
The Supreme Court was supposed to be politically insulated, according to the Constitution's authors.
This indicates that they desired the Court's decision-making to be free from political pressure or interference.
The Constitution's framers incorporated a number of clauses to safeguard the Court's independence in order to accomplish this purpose.
They include lifetime appointments for justices, allowing them to make decisions without worrying about losing their positions as a result of their convictions.
Also, justices' salaries cannot be decreased, shielding them from outside influences like money.
Finally, justices are appointed and not elected, meaning that they are not subject to the popular opinion of the moment when making decisions.
Ultimately, the Constitution was designed to create an independent and impartial Supreme Court, free from political influence.
To know more about Constitution,
https://brainly.com/question/470736
#SPJ4
how do the texas and u.s. constitutions compare on the issue of impeachment?
In Texas, impeaching a person is simpler than doing so in the federal government.
What is the federal government?
In a sense, a federal government is a structure created to transfer power from the wealthy to the underprivileged. The larger, more powerful central government of a country shares power with the nation's smaller state and regional administrations. This is accomplished by giving each sector-specific duties so that the federal government, as well as the state and local governments, each have their own tasks to complete. The Constitution of the United States mandates that the federal government can continue to exercise authority over a number of activities, including, to mention a few, the establishment of lower courts, the issuance of patents, and the creation of money. The authority to declare war is another example of a federal government obligation.
To learn more about federal government visit;
https://brainly.com/question/371257
#SPJ1
discuss two reasons why the framers created a bicameral legislature
The framers created a bicameral legislature in order to prevent harsh litigation, protect democracy, and secure deliberation.
A bicameral legislation is a lawmaking body consisting of two chambers of legislation, The farmers choose the bicameral legislation to maintain a balance and keep a check on equal representation of each state in the legislature, protect interest of each state and maintain democracy and fairness in making of any new law or statutes. Larger states demanded greater representation on the basis of their population which would give them more power but smaller states wanted equal representation so that it would not tranny the majority, considering both the opinions the farmers of the constitution formed both the system the house of representatives based on the population of a state and the senate giving equal rights to the states, which solved two major problems of biased litigation and protected democracy.
Know more about "bicameral legislature" visit
brainly.com/question/2880693
#SPJ4