The correct answer is: violation of individual liberties, and the violation of the national and international laws.
As much as the government has plausible for doing it so, as we look back at the history of terrorist attacks, the government would argue the indefinite detention without, considering it aa form of prevention. If we know the human rights we will realize the most viable and obvious argument for being against that type of detention is the violation of national and international laws about the individual liberties. That's when there is no evidence of crime and when the individual does not represent national threat. It may be controversial the way government tries to deal with issues like that, but international organizations has made very clear their points about
As the President of the United States, I believe that President Andrew should be rated a four.
<h3>Why I rated him 4</h3>
The reason for this rating is due to the fact that he was responsible for several pacts that helped to displace a lot of Native Indians from areas that were rightfully theirs.
I consider this act inhumane and believe that there would have been other ways of going about issues at the time.
Read more on President Andrew Jackson here:brainly.com/question/15647756
Answer:
incorporated into laws by either the state or federal government.
Answer:
I believe the answer is:
A) The government should exercise only the powers specifically listed in the Constitution
Strict constitutionist believe that everything that written under the constitution should be followed word by words without any opening for other interpretations.
The opposition of the strict constitutionist argued that we need to provide room for improvement since there are a lot of things in the constitution that still deemed as unfair. For example, under initial constitution, women were not allowed to vote
