Answer:
The reformers for the elimination of the patronage wanted civil service jobs to be filled by putting people who were truly qualified to fill the positions. The positions were filled through nepotism which was bad and they wanted a change.
They believed the positions should be based on merit and best hands should be given the posts. They didn’t want it to about any political affiliation or recommendation.
Hitler blames the Jewish people for Germany's problems, and with the help of other Nazis, triggers the Holocaust.
In which time period exactly?
The way to achieve this impartiality – to free judges to decide cases based on what the law actually requires, and on nothing else – is to ensure that the judiciary is independent, or, put differently, not subject to reprisals for decisions on the bench.
But judicial independence is not an absolute or singular value defining our courts. The principle of judicial restraint is equally important – and it is inextricably linked to judicial independence. At one level, the tension between the two seems inescapable. But there is an important sense in which an independent judiciary and judicial restraint are flip sides of the same coin. Both aim to minimize the influence of extraneous factors on judicial decision-making. A judge must not decide a case with an eye toward public approbation, because whether a particular result is popular is irrelevant to whether it is legally sound. In the same way, a judge must not consult
The correct answer to this open question is the following.
People who did not want to answer the questions from the Committee was indicted for contempt of Congress and were sent to prison. Some other people were put on a blacklist in the workplace and lost their jobs and found very difficult to find other company that hires them.
Many members of society considered that that represented such a "wich hunt," that only ruined people's reputation and limited their freedom of speech.
