If this is a true/false question, it's tricky. It's essentially true, because Lincoln's proclamation did not outlaw slavery in states that were loyal to the Union. The proclamation, at the time it was issued, applied to slaves in states that were in rebellion against the Union.
Historical context/details:
President Abraham Lincoln issued The Emancipation Proclamation as an executive order on January 1, 1863. The executive order declared freedom for slaves in ten Confederate states in rebellion against the Union. It also allowed that freed slaves could join the Union Army to fight for the cause of reuniting the nation and ending slavery. As summarized by the Historical Society of Pennsylvania, "The Proclamation broadened the goals of the Union war effort; it made the eradication of slavery into an explicit Union goal, in addition to the reuniting of the country."
While Lincoln personally was strongly against slavery, he had to tread carefully in his role as president and commander-in-chief. The Emancipation Proclamation was carefully worded in order to retain the support of four border slave states, which remained in the Union though they were states that permitted slavery, were Maryland, Missouri, Delaware, and Kentucky. Lincoln wanted to keep those states loyal to the Union cause.
Answer:
Lorenzo de Zavala
Explanation:
Because he had supported Texas independence, Santa Anna branded Lorenzo de Zavala a traitor to Mexico. Yet some Texas leaders were also suspicious of him.
Marbury v. Madison marked the moment that the Supreme Court established itself as a co-equal branch of government.
In Marbury v. Madison, the Supreme Court carved out a space where it declared that it had the ability to review laws to determine whether they were constitutional.
While the Supreme Court rarely knocked a law down as unconstitutional in the 1800s, everyone now knew that they could. This quote, as I have said elsewhere, is the Supreme Court stating that the Judicial branch determines what the law is and isn't.
True if that what your asking if not check the cpi
Answer:
Criminal justice enforcement must upgrade technological equipment and employ quality staff that can deal with computer crime on a serious level. They should take cybercrime seriously and treat it as such. The penalty should be also equal to the crime. Additionally, they should be sure to promote safe practices for computer handling to prevent crime.
Explanation:
Law enforcement should improve and upgrade their practices and work with a cause of dealing with computers and cybercrime. The field of cybercrimes is developing fast and daily, and actions against it should be updated regularly. Because of this, criminal justice should:
- <u>Employ computer experts</u> that can research the field fast as it is updated, so they can keep up with new practices and changes
- <u>Technical capabilities of law enforcement must be updated frequently </u>and adapted to really solve computer crimes, as serious technology should be used to tackle crime
- Ensure people report all crimes and wrongdoings
- <u>Analyze crimes properly </u>and throughout just as they would with regular crime
- Be sure to have <u>proper practices of punishment</u> and laws that follow the seriousness of the crimes, as the justice system can often take cyberspace and cyber crimes with not enough seriousness
- They should work on<u> raising awareness of security and practices</u>, so people can be less prone to computer crime attacks and can prevent damage.