Answer:
A)
Explanation:
The main difference between these two terms is that a concurring opinion agrees with the majority decision, but for different legal reasons, while a dissenting opinion explains why one or more justices disagree with the majority. Each of which tends to ocurr often in court cases where various judges analyze and pass judgment of another judges decision on a specific case. With a concurring opinion most, if not all, judges agree with the decision that has been made but tend to give different reasons as to why they believe the decision was justified.
The correct answer to this open question is the following.
Supreme Court Justice Holmes once included this statement in a majority opinion: "During wartime, utterances tolerable in peacetime can be punished." This statement informed the Supreme Court's later decisions on freedom of speech in that in times of war, citizens are not allowed to express comments or critics that could compromise the national security of the country. So in this case, freedom of speech could be suppressed during the time of war.
In the past, there had been incidents that could have compromised the strategy of the war due to some espionage activities. That is why the federal government has to be cautious with the information that is shared during war times.
They wanted to have land that they could farm. The east was already crowded by large farms and cities. They were also in search of gold. There were also many trees that could be cut down and sent east, these people sought out a way to make money, or provide for their families that was not in the congested dirty cities of the east.
Pretty sure it’s artisan correct me if I’m wrong
