Answer: except no 4 justice hear oral argument for 50weeks but only on Mondays.
Explanation: it is only on the month of May to June that the court meet on Mondays at 10am but as the month progresses(mainly the last week's) additional days are added to it usually called opinion days.
Oral argument in the supreme Court are held on Mondays, Tuesday and Wednesday alone unless the court deem it fit to add an additional day or days to it. Oral argument are open to public view with a specific time attached to it.
The correct answer is tertiary circular reactions. The
tertiary circular reactions often occur between the age of 12-18 months old by
which the child is likely to engage to overt trial and error to problem
solving, the child Is likely to adapt purposefully in order to establish schemes
in specific situations and lastly, the child engages to experimental quality in
his or her behavior.
Out of Africa theory
This theory is supported by modern research that early primate life begun in Africa and later spread to other parts of the world. several prehistoric sites have been unearthed in the East African region which supports these assertions.
Answer:
a. The Equal Protection Clause is a clause from the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The clause provides that "nor shall any State [...] deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws".
Its purpose is to apply substantially more constitutional restrictions against the states than had applied before the Civil War. Hence, in Shaw v. Reno, 509 U.S. 630 (1993), Supreme Court held that redistricting based on race must be held to a standard of strict scrutiny under the equal protection clause while bodies doing redistricting must be conscious of race to the extent that they must ensure compliance with the Voting Rights Act.
While in the case of Easley v. Cromartie, 532 U.S. 234 (2001), Supreme Court held that the State violated the Equal Protection Clause in drawing the 1997 boundaries was based on clearly erroneous findings.
b. In the case of Easley v. Cromartie, an appeal from the decision given in hunt v. Cromartie was filed in the supreme court of the United States by Easley. In hunt v. Cromartie, the court held that the legislature of North Carolina did not use the factor of race while drawing the boundaries in the twelfth congressional district,1992. It was held by the court that the legislature did not violate the equal protection clause of the constitution and no evidence to prove that legislature set its boundaries on a racial basis rather than a political basis.
In Easley v Cromartie the appeal was that drawing the boundaries for voting violated the equal protection clause of the constitution. The supreme court of the United States held that the decision of the district court is erroneous because it actually relied upon racial factors and this is not in the interest of the state.
In Shaw v. Reno the court concluded that the plan of North Carolina tried to segregate the voters on the basis of race.
