Answer:
(D) A and B or both correct
Explanation:
Answer:
idk
Explanation:idk
Answer:
ummmmmmmmmmmmm i need the same answer
Explanation:
SoRrY :O
Answer:
Article III of the Constitution establishes a very high bar for convicting an American for treason. However, like other aspects of the Constitution, the exact meaning of this provision is being discussed by constitutional scholars. This reads the following:
Treason against the United States shall consist solely of waging war against them, or of adhering to their enemies, providing them with assistance and comfort. No person shall be convicted of Treason except on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on the open court confession.
Explanation:
The explanation the prosecutions for treason are very rare is that the conviction requires two witnesses to the act of treason. In summary, by default, the definition of treason is quite narrow. This means that conviction for treason in American history is very difficult and therefore very rare.
In the United States, at least two witnesses are generally required to convict someone of treason.
In the United States, the number of witnesses required to convict someone of treason varies depending on the circumstances. The United States Constitution states that no person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court. This means that at least two witnesses are generally required for a conviction, although the exact number can be determined by the court in specific cases.
#SPJ6
NEEDED FOR A TEST ASAP
a.With the president
b.With foreign leaders
c.With regular US citizens
d.With members of Congress
Answer:
C. :)
Explanation:
Answer:
b. With foreign leaders
Explanation:
Ideas for laws that CAN start in all of these places:
c. With regular US citizens ⇒ You and I can come up with ideas for laws. In fact, most of the ideas for laws come from just regular US citizens.
d. With members of Congress ⇒ Within Congress, representatives can come up with ideas for laws to help benefit the country. Members of the House of Representatives and the Senate can both do that.
a. With the president ⇒ The president comes up with laws because he’s the one responsible for our country. So the president does still come up with ideas for laws to help with our country. But it’s not like the president gets to come up with anything he wants to and he can just sign the bill and it becomes a law. Every idea for a law always goes to Congress where the members decide if it’s good or not, including the president’s ideas.
Ideas for laws that CANNOT start in this place (the correct answer):
b. With foreign leaders ⇒ Foreign leaders are leaders that are outside of our country. That’s what foreign means: overseas, distant, away, etc. Foreign leaders can’t come with ideas for laws because there not even in/part of our country.
In case you still don’t understand:
Example: Let’s say there is a King in England (there isn’t a king in England but this is just an example). Now, does the King of England get to come up with ideas for laws for our country? Absolutly not! He’s totally from a different country, and he doesn’t have the right to be in America’s business in making laws. He deals with his own country, not ours.
Hence,
Ideas for laws can start in all of these places EXCEPT:
b. With foreign leaders
Hope this helps! :D
Answer:
Explanation:
Thurgood Marshall was the first Supreme Court justice of African descend. He was a lawyer by profession and played an important role in bringing racial equality and liberty during the Civil Rights Movement.
Marshall became a lawyer for the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and it was during this time he served as chief attorney for the plaintiffs in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka. He successfully led the case and won a unanimous verdict against school segregation.
This case helped him gain lots of recognition and admiration. President Johnson appointed him as the first African-American Supreme Court justice in 1967.
Answer:
Thurgood Marshall
Explanation:
I took the test
I believe it is irresponsible to elect anyone by a popular vote. To ensure that it is fair and has not been slashed or meddled with, they should employ the electoral college.
All Justices hold their positions for life and are chosen by the President, who also proposes them to the Senate for confirmation. Justices are regarded as being shielded from political pressure while making decisions because they are not required to run for re-election or engage in re-election campaigns. Unless they retire, pass away, are impeached and found guilty by Congress, or resign themselves, justices may continue to serve.
The majority of the cases the Court hears are appealed, and because the Court is the last legal arbitrator of federal law issues in the United States, its rulings are final and cannot be appealed to any other body. The Court may, however, take into account appeals from the top state courts or from federal appellate courts. Notwithstanding the fact that every legal issue may be appealed to the Supreme Court.
Learn more about judges here:
#SPJ2
Answer:
I think that electing anyone through popular vote is not smart. They should use the electoral college to make sure it's unbaised and not hacked or medled in.
Explanation: