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
Answer:
The slaves didn't have rights to vote
Explanation:
The white people owned the black's, so they limited any rights for them.
The mighty Sahara desert is to the west of the Nile it is famous for getting up to 120degrees and down to 40 at night time
Venus hated Psyche passionately because of her great beauty
The point of checks and balances was to make sure no one branch would be able to control too much power, and it created a separation of powers.
