Answer: (this is gonna be a crazy answer)
Explanation: I think it was right to drop the bomb on Japan. The reason for this is because even though many people died, and the fact that most of their land had gotten destroyed, this helped them resolve their problem between the two. If it weren't for the bomb, they would have fought longer. And after that tragedy, this gave Americans and the Japanese to bond and help rebuild japan not only to protect them from other bombs, but to also make sure that no one else can take their land. Therefore, even though it may not have been the best decision, it was right to to drop the bomb on them.
(You don't have to agree with this this is just my opinion but hopefully you get an idea to form your own sentence if you can)
Correct answer: on the basis of the age of sitting judges.
Context/explanation:
President Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR) was eager to implement his New Deal programs as an antidote to the Great Depression. However, the US Supreme Court had already ruled that some provisions of the New Deal were unconstitutional, because they took too much power into the hands of the federal government, especially the executive branch of the federal government. So, riding the momentum of his landslide reelection victory in 1936, in February of 1937, FDR proposed a plan to expand the Supreme Court to as many as 15 judges. The plan offered to provide full pay to justices over age 70 who would retire. If the older justices didn't retire, assistant justices (with full voting rights) would be appointed to sit with those existing justices. This was a way FDR hoped to give the court a liberal majority that would side with his programs.
As it turned out, before FDR's proposal came up for a vote in Congress, two of the sitting justices came over to his side of the argument, and the Supreme Court narrowly approved as constitutional both the Social Security Act and the National Labor Relations Act. So his plan (which failed in the US Senate) became unnecessary to his purposes.
Roosevelt's "court-packing" scheme was unpopular. It was seen as an attempt to take away the independence of the judicial branch of government.
Answer:
- A bill is born and being proposed
- The, the bill is referred to the committee , at this point the bill is examined carefully by the committee
- The subcommittee held a hearing
- The bill is being marked up by the subcommittee
- Committee action to report the bill
- Voting
- If the bill passed the voting, it's referred to other chamber
- Conference committee action
- After the house and senate approve the bill , it brought up to the president
NATO is still relevant today because it serves as a vital platform for collective defense and cooperation among member states.
NATO's continued relevance in the modern world can be attributed to several factors. Firstly, the alliance provides a framework for collective defense ensuring that member states can respond collectively to any aggression or security threats.
This serves as a deterrent and promotes stability in the Euro-Atlantic region. Also, NATO facilitates military cooperation, intelligence sharing, and joint training exercises which enhance interoperability and effectiveness among member forces.
Read more about NATO
#SPJ6
Allied nations should always be ready to respond to threats.
B. Pressure groups
C. Propaganda
D. Publicrelations
Answer: C) ipconfig
Explanation: