Answer:
Correct answer is A. Determine the resource's original medium of production.
Explanation:
A is correct answer because it is important to know how reliable the source - is it forged or not, and its validity - to see if the information contained there are true.
B is wrong because it is not important who the author is, but is he reliable enough.
C is wrong because it doesn't matter how many time the resource has been published, if it is not reliable.
D is not important, because idea itself is not telling us enough about its importance and validity.
Slaves were sold which means money was traded and you need money to successfully thrive and so when it ended there was no more money so they had to find different ways and it took a while.
Answer:
Judicial review is the power of the courts to declare that acts of the other branches of government are unconstitutional, and thus unenforceable. For example if Congress were to pass a law banning newspapers from printing information about certain political matters, courts would have the authority to rule that this law violates the First Amendment, and is therefore unconstitutional. State courts also have the power to strike down their own state’s laws based on the state or federal constitutions.
Today, we take judicial review for granted. In fact, it is one of the main characteristics of government in the United States. On an almost daily basis, court decisions come down from around the country striking down state and federal rules as being unconstitutional. Some of the topics of these laws in recent times include same sex marriage bans, voter identification laws, gun restrictions, government surveillance programs and restrictions on abortion.
Other countries have also gotten in on the concept of judicial review. A Romanian court recently ruled that a law granting immunity to lawmakers and banning certain types of speech against public officials was unconstitutional. Greek courts have ruled that certain wage cuts for public employees are unconstitutional. The legal system of the European Union specifically gives the Court of Justice of the European Union the power of judicial review. The power of judicial review is also afforded to the courts of Canada, Japan, India and other countries. Clearly, the world trend is in favor of giving courts the power to review the acts of the other branches of government.
However, it was not always so. In fact, the idea that the courts have the power to strike down laws duly passed by the legislature is not much older than is the United States. In the civil law system, judges are seen as those who apply the law, with no power to create (or destroy) legal principles. In the (British) common law system, on which American law is based, judges are seen as sources of law, capable of creating new legal principles, and also capable of rejecting legal principles that are no longer valid. However, as Britain has no Constitution, the principle that a court could strike down a law as being unconstitutional was not relevant in Britain. Moreover, even to this day, Britain has an attachment to the idea of legislative supremacy. Therefore, judges in the United Kingdom do not have the power to strike down legislation.
Explanation:
nationalparalegal.edu /JudicialReview.aspx
The government should help make the economic system more fair.
Answer: Option B.
<u>Explanation:</u>
The democratic form of government is that government which considers all the citizens of the country as equal. The government wants that there should be no injustice against any section of the society and all should be considered as the same.
Following this meaning of the democratic form of government, the economic system of the country should also be that which does not discriminate against any one in the society. It should give equal access to the resources to all the citizens of the society and try to reduce the gap between the rich and the poor.
