They left them religious freedom, to have belief in what they choose
The U.S Supreme Court pronounced the balancing test in the Turner v. Safley case. The balancing test means that the courts must balance the rights of inmates against the penological concerns of security and order.
In this case, the U.S Supreme Court upheld broad restriction on inmate-to-inmate correspondence and, in the process, reaffirmed its commitment to a deferential standard in prisoner speech cases.
In Justice O’Connor’s opinion in Turner v. Safley, he identified four factors to consider when applying this standard:
- Whether or not there is a valid, rational link between the regulation and the governmental interest advanced to justify it;
- Whether inmates are left with alternative means of exercising the right that the regulation restricts;
- Whether accommodating the asserted right would have a significant ripple effect on fellow inmates or prison staff;
- And whether there is a ready alternative to the regulation that fully accommodates the asserted right at a minimal cost to valid penological interests.
To know more about penology here-
brainly.com/question/28043931
#SPJ4
Answer: Representative Greggs won her last election by more than 7% of the vote and feels confident that she is likely to be reelected. This may give her more room to vote with her conscience on bills, even if a majority of her constituents disagree with some of her positions; this is an example of trustee behavior.
However, Representative Carver is a Democrat representing a district that usually votes Republican and won his last election by only 1% of the vote, so he may feel in danger of losing his next election. He is more likely to act as a delegate, prioritizing his constituents' wishes over his own judgment, in order to guarantee a win in his next election.
Explanation:
Answer:A.the interference was unnecessary for whole population that's was negligible
