Answer:
Because the Federal District Court has original jurisdiction, it can choose to take the case or not. It takes precedence over all.
Answer:
Anti-federalists insisted that a Bill of Rights must be included in the Constitution to protect individual's rights against a powerful central government.The anti-Federalists would most likely agree with the argument that government should tax only to raise money for its essential functions, which is from the Republican position on the economy.
As some people think that everyone would be better off if banks and other financial institutions stopped issuing loans or credit cards, the statement that supports this argument is People would be less likely to become overwhelmed by debt.
<h3>What is the function of loans or credit cards?</h3>
Both the loans or credit cards are form of credit service offered by financial institutions.
Basically, the Personal loans offer borrowed funds in one initial lump sum with relatively lower interest rates and must be repaid over a finite period of time while the Credit cards give a borrower access to funds as long as the account remains in good standing.
Hence, the statement that supports this argument is People would be less likely to become overwhelmed by debt.
Therefore, the Option C is correct,
Read more about financial institutions
brainly.com/question/13442420
#SPJ1
Answer:
D
Explanation:
Because a witness must be able to recollect and communicate the events in the situation, determine fact from fiction, and have an appreciation of and adherence to the veracity requirement safeguarded by the nature of the U.S Constitution and structure of the American judicial system in order to be questioned as a witness. Without this, the witness would be useless in the case.
Answer:
Yes. Article XXVIII of the Arizona constitution is a violation of Maria-Kelly's freedom of speech as enshrined in the first amendment to the US Constitution.
Explanation:
The first amendment to the constitution guarantees Maria-Kelly freedom of speech. Therefore, to force Maria-Kelly not to speak Spanish to some Spanish-speaking persons with whom she dealt in the course of her work is an abridgment of her right to self-expression. Conclusively, Article XXVIII clearly violated her constitutionally protected free speech rights.
