1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
8090 [49]
3 years ago
14

Help me please thank you

History
1 answer:
goblinko [34]3 years ago
3 0
Durkheim argued that deviance is a perfectly normal and  <span>required</span> part of any society because it contributes to the social order
You might be interested in
After the fall of the Soviet Union,
mrs_skeptik [129]
Generally speaking, after the fall of the Soviet Union "<span>a. ethnic conflicts and separatist movements threatened stability," since there was an immediate collapse in the major power structure that had "tied" the nation together. </span>
5 0
3 years ago
What was one reason why James Madison initially opposed including the Bill of Rights in the Constitution?
sveta [45]

One reason why James Madison initially opposed including the Bill of Rights in the Constitution was that: A. He feared that rights that were not listed might be unprotected.

<h3>Who is James Madison?</h3>

James Madison was an American expansionist, diplomat, statesman and founding father of the Constitution of the United States of America. He was born on the 16th of March, 1751 and he was elected to serve as the fourth president of the United States of America from 1809 to 1817.

The title that was given to James Madison for his work at the Constitutional Convention is Father of the Constitution because he played a significant role in the drafting and promotion of the US Bill of Rights and the Constitution.

During the drafting of the Constitution, James Madison initially opposed including the Bill of Rights in the Constitution because he feared that rights such as citizen's rights that were not listed explicitly might be unprotected.

Read more on James Madison here: brainly.com/question/5972312

#SPJ1

Complete Question:

What was one reason why James Madison initially opposed including the Bill of Rights in the Constitution?

He feared that rights that were not listed might be unprotected.

He believed that it was impossible to understand natural rights.

He feared the Bill of Rights would limit the power of the states.

He thought that there should be no flexibility in guaranteed rights.

7 0
2 years ago
Someone pls answer this for me lol
Ivanshal [37]

<u>These are basic principles of the US Constitution.</u>

<u>Federalism: </u>Power is divided between the national government and the state governments

<u>Popular Sovereignty</u>: Government gets its power from the people generally through their elected representatives.

<u>Separation of powers:</u> Power is divided among three branches of government

<u>Checks and Balances</u><u>:</u>No branch of government has more power than the other

<u>Limited government: </u>A government can only do what its people give it authority to do.

6 0
3 years ago
13 Points! Please help ASAP^^
Hitman42 [59]

Answer:

Appellate brief

An appellate brief is a written legal argument presented to an appellate court. Its purpose is to persuade the higher court to uphold or reverse the trial court’s decision. Briefs of this kind are therefore geared to presenting the issues involved in the case from the perspective of one side only.

Appellate briefs from both sides can be very valuable to anyone assessing the legal issues raised in a case. Unfortunately, they are rarely published. The U.S. Supreme Court is the only court for which briefs are regularly available in published form. The Landmark Briefs series (REF. LAW KF 101.9 .K8) includes the full texts of briefs relating to a very few of the many cases heard by this court. In addition, summaries of the briefs filed on behalf of the plaintiff or defendant for all cases reported are included in the U.S. Supreme Court Reports. Lawyer’s Ed., 2nd. series (REF. LAW KF 101 .A42).

Student brief

A student brief is a short summary and analysis of the case prepared for use in classroom discussion. It is a set of notes, presented in a systematic way, in order to sort out the parties, identify the issues, ascertain what was decided, and analyze the reasoning behind decisions made by the courts.

Although student briefs always include the same items of information, the form in which these items are set out can vary. Before committing yourself to a particular form for briefing cases, check with your instructor to ensure that the form you have chosen is acceptable.

The parties and how to keep track of them

Beginning students often have difficulty identifying relationships between the parties involved in court cases. The following definitions may help:

Plaintiffs sue defendants in civil suits in trial courts.

The government (state or federal) prosecutes defendants in criminal cases in trial courts.

The losing party in a criminal prosecution or a civil action may ask a higher (appellate) court to review the case on the ground that the trial court judge made a mistake. If the law gives the loser the right to a higher court review, his or her lawyers will appeal. If the loser does not have this right, his or her lawyers may ask the court for a writ of certiorari. Under this procedure, the appellate court is being asked to exercise its lawful discretion in granting the cases a hearing for review.

For example, a defendant convicted in a federal district court has the right to appeal this decision in the Court of Appeals of the circuit and this court cannot refuse to hear it. The party losing in this appellate court can request that the case be reviewed by the Supreme Court, but, unless certain special circumstances apply, has no right to a hearing.

These two procedures, appeals and petitions for certiorari, are sometimes loosely grouped together as “appeals.” However, there is, as shown, a difference between them, and you should know it.

A person who seeks a writ of certiorari, that is, a ruling by a higher court that it hear the case, is known as a petitioner. The person who must respond to the petition, that is, the winner in the lower court, is called the respondent.

A person who files a formal appeal demanding appellate review as a matter of right is known as the appellant. His or her opponent is the appellee.

The name of the party initiating the action in court, at any level on the judicial ladder, always appears first in the legal papers. For example, Arlo Tatum and others sued in Federal District Court for an injunction against Secretary of Defense Melvin Laird and others to stop the Army from spying on them. Tatum and his friends became plaintiffs and the case was then known as Tatum v. Laird. The Tatum group lost in the District Court and appealed to the Court of Appeals, where they were referred to as the appellants, and the defendants became the appellees. Thus the case was still known at Tatum v. Laird.

When Tatum and his fellow appellants won in the Court of Appeals, Laird and his fellow appellees decided to seek review by the Supreme Court. They successfully petitioned for a writ of certiorari from the Supreme Court directing the Court of Appeals to send up the record of the case (trial court transcript, motion papers, and assorted legal documents) to the Supreme Court.

At this point the name of the case changed to Laird v. Tatum: Laird and associates were now the petitioners, and Tatum and his fellows were the respondents. Several church groups and a group of former intelligence agents obtained permission to file briefs (written arguments) on behalf of the respondents to help persuade the Court to arrive at a decision favorable to them. Each of these groups was termed an amicus curiae, or “friend of the court.”

In criminal cases, switches in the titles of cases are common, because most reach the appellate courts as a result of an appeal by a convicted defendant. Thus, the case ofArizona v. Miranda later became Miranda v. Arizona.

Student briefs

Explanation:

6 0
3 years ago
Who was John jay? Why was he important?
Vladimir79 [104]
John Jay was the first chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, Patriot, diplomat, one of the Founding Fathers, signatory to the Treaty of Paris in 1783, and the second Governor of New York.
5 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • How did u.s. naval tactics used in cuba differ from those in the philippines?
    6·2 answers
  • What colony did quakers stay in
    9·1 answer
  • When did adding candles to a birthday cake originate?
    5·2 answers
  • The portuguese mariner who sailed to calicut in 1498 was
    6·1 answer
  • Managing school finances and work-related finances are two completely separate types of tasks.
    11·1 answer
  • How did the failure of the league of nations lead to ww2 affect the formation of the United Nations
    7·1 answer
  • As the Great Depression began in 1929, and millions of Americans found themselves in a terrible economic position, President Her
    5·2 answers
  • If rome had no master plan for expansion, why did it expand ?
    5·1 answer
  • Which of the following is not an impact of the Colombian exchange on culture?
    13·1 answer
  • This amendment states that the powers not delegated to the United States by the constitution nor prohibited by it to the States
    13·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!