Answer:
The Supreme Court decision that decided the 2000 Presidential Election should go down in history as one of the court's most ill-conceived judgments. In issuing its poorly-reasoned ruling in Bush v. Gore, the court majority unnecessarily exposed itself to charges of partisanship and risked undermining the court's stature as an independent, impartial arbiter of the law. Although the court majority correctly identified constitutional problems in the specific recount proceedings ordered by the Florida Supreme Court, the decision to end all recount attempts did immeasurable damage to the equal protection rights the court claimed to be guarding, since it favored a convenient and timely tabulation of ballots over an accurate recording of the vote. In the controversy that followed this decision, some critics of the majority decision argued that the court had no business taking on Bush v. Gore in the first place, that it should have remained solely within the Florida courts (Ginsburg, J. [Dissent] Bush v. Gore [2000]). This paper will argue that the court was correct to intervene but that umm the resulting decision was flawed and inconsistent, with potentially serious, adverse implications for the Federal judiciary if the court continues to issue rulings in this way.
Explanation:
B. to demonstrate support for
It was the Potsdam Conference that decided on how to address the issues arising from the surrender of Nazi Germany. The conference was attended by <span>The Big Three — Soviet leader Joseph Stalin, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill (replaced on July 26 by Prime Minister Clement Attlee), and U.S. President Harry Truman — in which they met in </span>Potsdam<span>, Germany, from July 17 to August 2, 1945, to negotiate terms for the end of World War II.</span>
These lands had been worked by settlers and the much larger settlements of local Native American Kumeyaay peoples on the missions
Q- What Kind Of Soil Is Found In The Piney Woods Region?
A- A Mixture Of Sand And Clay
