If one side launched a nuke so would the other therefore keeping each side from wanting to use nuclear weapons
Advantage---Loose constructionists tend to uphold civil rights and liberties. Judicially active, loose constructionist judges such as Ruth Bader Ginsburg tend to dissent in cases which infringe civil liberties such as Salinas v Texas (2013) and agree with rulings that don't e.g. 2015 Same sex rulingAdvantage---Loose constructionists often protect minorities, especially those incompatible with Congress or the executive. This is because loose constructionists are not scared to overturn laws or actions made by Congress or the executive e.g. Brown v Board of EducationDisadvantage---Loose constructionists tend to be judicially active, which has fuelled arguments on the politicisation of the Court. They 'legislate from the bench' by striking down laws as unconstitutional. This is undemocratic and elitist, as they have mandate from the electorateDisadvantage---Loose constructionists tend to be too sensitive to public opinion, which could hamper the neutrality and independence of the Court. However, some public support is necessary to maintain the authority of the Court.
It was an attack weapon which caused other countries to get tensions and that lead to war. it would also have mass detrition an greater goods.
The Palmer Raids didn't let anyone have freedom of speech against the government
