Supreme court justices are often active in the selection of new justices, advising the president as to whom he should pick.
name and explain both. potential positive benefits and a potential negative results o allowing the justices to influence the presidents choice.
<u>K</u><u>e</u><u>n</u><u>y</u><u>a</u><u> </u><u>was</u><u> </u><u>collonised</u><u> </u><u>b</u><u>y</u><u> </u><u>the</u><u> </u><u>British</u><u> </u><u>empire</u><u> </u><u>to protect its commercial interests in East Africa</u><u>.</u><u> </u><u>The</u><u> </u><u>reasons</u><u> </u><u>w</u><u>e</u><u>r</u><u>e</u><u> </u><u>mainly economic, political and religious</u>
Hope this helped you- have a good day bro cya)
The correct answer is -Judges
That is, state courts interpret them in comparison to other similar cases, or compare them to constitutional laws.
It should be a because he was using his method of nonviolent protests
Answer:
1. The fact that a times most people tends to be obviously unethical without any reasonable explanations to back up their inactivity.
2. I did not agree with the idea of generality in the question which obviously points out that everybody is unethical to some extent which might be false because even at the course of generality, there most be an exception.
Explanation:
To be unethical means to be unable to conform to the given standards or rules of an organization professionally.