1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
charle [14.2K]
2 years ago
9

A Supreme Court justice who agrees with the majority in a case, but disagrees in whole

Law
1 answer:
igomit [66]2 years ago
3 0

Answer:

concurring

Explanation:

a concurring opinion is in certain legal systems a written opinion by one or more judges of a court which agrees with the decision made by the majority of the court, but states different or additional reasons as the basis for their decision.

You might be interested in
Challenges of separation of power
Scrat [10]
In several Supreme Court decisions this decade, the question of whether a constitutional attack on a statute should be considered “as applied” to the actual facts of the case before the Court or “on the face” of the statute has been a difficult preliminary issue for the Court. The issue has prompted abundant academic discussion. Recently, scholars have noted a preference within the Roberts Court for as-applied constitutional challenges. However, the cases cited as evidence for the Roberts Court’s preference for as-applied challenges all involve constitutional challenges which concede the legislative power to enact the provision but nevertheless argue for unconstitutionality because the statute intrudes upon rights or liberties protected by the Constitution. Of course, this is not the only type of constitutional challenge to a statute; some constitutional challenges attack the underlying power of the legislative branch to pass the statute in question. Modern scholarship, however, as well as the Supreme Court, has mostly ignored the difference between these two different types of constitutional challenges to statutes when discussing facial and as-applied constitutional challenges. In glossing over this difference, considerations which fundamentally affect whether a facial or as-applied challenge is appropriate have gone unnoticed. By clearly distinguishing between these two very different types of constitutional challenges, and the respective role of a federal court in adjudicating each of these challenges, a new perspective can be gained on the exceedingly difficult question of when a facial or as-applied challenge to a statute is appropriate. In this Article, I argue that federal courts are constitutionally compelled to consider the constitutionality of a statute on its face when the power of Congress to pass the law has been challenged. Under the separation of powers principles enunciated in I.N.S. v. Chadha and Clinton v. New York, federal courts are not free to ignore the “finely wrought” procedures described in the Constitution for the creation of federal law by “picking and choosing” constitutional applications from unconstitutional applications of the federal statute, at least when the statute has been challenged as exceeding Congress’s enumerated powers in the Constitution. The separation of powers principles of I.N.S. and Clinton, which preclude a “legislative veto” or an executive “line item veto,” should similarly preclude a “judicial application veto” of a law that has been challenged as exceeding Congress’s Constitutional authority.
6 0
3 years ago
If the president dies, or is removed from office the vice president will become president, knowing that a president can only ser
ycow [4]
Yes it is possible though it hasn’t happened it is possible the most a person can be president is 10 years.


Hope it helps
8 0
3 years ago
California has been referred to as "the ungovernable state". Several governors have attempted to effectively govern the state in
Neko [114]

Answer:

Explanation:

The California Republic is a western state of the United State. It shares its border with Mexico along the ocean, Pacific. In 2009, California is declared all over the media and the public as the "ungovernable state". They claimed that the Governors were not able to govern the state properly in conjunction to the legislature and the courts of the state. Decentring is used to remark the governance of the state that the governors have a dominion on the rule and that the directives are happening within the communal factors.

Some of the possible reasons are :

1. Proposition 13 : The effect of the proposition 13, the property tax limit measures that was passed in the year 1978 is the part of damage the initiative did to California.

2.Budget Initiative

3. Gerrymandering

4. Terms limit

5. Two thirds votes of the legislature to pass a budget.

6. Boom and the bust taxation.

5 0
2 years ago
Which step of the policy evaluation process would ask you to determine if a policy helps to ensure domestic tranquility?
Arturiano [62]

Answer:

E. Identity the problem.

Explanation:

To ensure domestic tranquility , one must identity the problem to process with.

3 0
2 years ago
In summarizing a Supreme Court majority opinion, which of these is most
Scrat [10]

Answer:

Explanation:B. A full explanation of the thesis of the text

4 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • Barbie committed a felony and has to appear in court.
    11·2 answers
  • Of the following countries, which one is most likely to report the highest murder rate?
    9·2 answers
  • Jerry, age 23, a full-time student and not disabled, lives with william and sheila carson. jerry is william’s older brother. jer
    8·1 answer
  • James Keller was an employee at Radical Boards, Inc. Radical Boards is a surf and skateboard shop that also sells clothing. Whil
    11·1 answer
  • What is law.what is constitutional law and mercantille law
    9·1 answer
  • If the court in Montana wants to be able to hear the case against Wizard Internet, the court has to have:
    7·1 answer
  • Yeah. Yeah<br> Just space<br> ajdkasdksfakjhdsfjkh
    6·2 answers
  • 19. Which of these vehicles must stop before crossing railroad tracks?
    8·1 answer
  • In what way has the executive article fueled debate on presidential power?
    8·1 answer
  • Summarize Arizona v Evans
    14·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!