Chief Justice John Marshall stated last 1803 in the case of Marbury v. Madison that "It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to particular cases, must of necessity expound and interpret that rule. If two laws conflict with each other, the courts must decide on the operation of each."
It implies that the judicial department applies the law and the understanding and interpretation therein would still be based on the designated person. If soever, the interpreter or representative in the judicial department would make any conflict with the intent, process, actual application of the law (the two representation of law), the courts would be the end to finalize the decision.
Answer:
The Constitution, through the Fourth Amendment, protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government. The Fourth Amendment, however, is not a guarantee against all searches and seizures, but only those that are deemed unreasonable under the law.
Answer:
I would say the answer is D
Explanation:
Working slowly or pretending to be sick leads to getting beat by their owners and was probably not something that a large group of slaves did. They did not have the rights to vote for someone and they did not hunt down other slaves that escaped.
The main reason was joining the Axis Powers, which earned them territory.
It was segregation....wasn't it?
