Answer:
People/Groups involved: Women's Christian Temperance Union (WCTU), Carry Nation, Frances Willard, and Anti-Saloon League.
Explanation:
I think this should be correct
Strict scrutiny, moderate scrutiny, and logical basis scrutiny are three tests.
To evaluate the legitimacy of differential treatment based on a suspicious classification, a Strict scrutiny test is applied (race, ethnic origin, religion).
In free exercise clause cases, the court previously applied strict scrutiny more frequently, as in Sherbert v. Verner (1963) and Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972), but the Employment Division v. Smith decision altered the approach (1990).
When a plaintiff accuses the government of discrimination, the courts frequently use strict scrutiny. The law must have been carefully crafted to satisfy a "compelling governmental interest" and have been passed by the legislature in order to pass rigorous scrutiny.
A law impacting a fundamental right must have a compelling state purpose in order to pass under the Strict Scrutiny criterion. In order to accomplish the goal or interest of the government, the law must also be carefully crafted.
To know more about Strict Scrutiny refer to: brainly.com/question/11550284
#SPJ1
The second paragraph of the United States Declaration of Independence says that "all men are created equal<span>, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness." Hope this helps... please make brainiest!</span><span />
Answer:
Augustus reorganized Roman life throughout the empire. He passed laws to encourage marital stability and renew religious practices. He instituted a system of taxation and a census while also expanding the network of Roman roads.
Explanation:
Answer:
Probably a mix of all these mechanisms:
1) awareness - you are not aware of the problem all the time (what eyes can't see)
2) empathy - info you get doesn't move you; you haven't lived through the problem, so you know it "intellectually" (but do not feel it).
3) knowing what to do to solve the problem - usually there are no "direct" actions you can take to solve the problem
4) thinking that you can make a difference - usually you don't believe you can change such a big problem (AAAND it seems to be a lot of work ... probably for nothing).
5) thinking there are "govs and organisations" better suited to solve such problems.
