According to egoism, the thing which an egoist might think about when compelled to serve on a jury is:
- We are obligated to honor the Constitution and its directive that everyone has a right to face a jury.
<h3>What is Egoism?</h3>
This refers to the philosophical and ethical theory which has self interest as the principal factor in the actions of a person.
With this in mind, we can see that according to egoism, an egoist who is compelled to serve on a jury believes that he is obligated to honor the Constitution and its directive that everyone has a right to face a jury.
Read more about egoism here:
brainly.com/question/4237669
Answer:
This statement is a simile because they include the words as to explain how those 2 objects are similar while a metaphor dont use the words like or as. So we can see that this is a simile.
Explanation:
hope this helps and have a great day/night/afternoon! :D
In advance, hope this helps!
The March of Washington was held on August 28, 1963, led by Martin Luther King Jr. The purpose was because of discrimination and segregation going on in that time period, and Dr. King was a huge role model in that darkness.
This program listed the events scheduled at the Lincoln Memorial during the August 28, 1963, March on Washington<span> for Jobs and Freedom. The highlight of the </span>march<span>, which attracted 250,000 people, was Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream" speech.
</span>
The march<span> was successful in pressuring the administration of John F. Kennedy to initiate a strong federal civil rights bill in Congress.</span>
Mr. Justice Jackson, dissenting. . . .
Much is said of the danger to liberty from the Army program for deporting and detaining these citizens of Japanese extraction. But a judicial construction of the due process clause that will sustain this order is a far more subtle blow to liberty than the promulgation of the order itself. A military order, however unconstitutional, is not apt to last longer than the military emergency. Even during that period a succeeding commander may revoke it all. But once a judicial opinion rationalizes such an order to show that it conforms to the Constitution, or rather rationalizes the Constitution to show that the Constitution sanctions such an order, the Court for all time has validated the principle of racial discrimination in criminal procedure and of transplanting American citizens. . . . A military commander may overstep the bounds of constitutionality, and it is an incident. But if we review and approve, that passing incident becomes the doctrine of the Constitution. There it has a generative power of its own, and all that it creates will be in its own image. Nothing better illustrates this danger than does the Court’s opinion in this case. . . .
yes i copy and pasted but this is your answer
