Question

a) Suppose that the federal govetnment wished to strip the Supreme Court of jurisdiction in all have as corpus petition of all individuals being held at Guantanamo Bay. What action could the president take to do so ?

Answer 1

Answer:

In this study, we tested the effects of NEAA-deprived diets and checkpoint inhibitor anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 in colon cancer using syngeneic mouse model (Balb/c) bearing tumors of mouse colorectal cancer cell line CT-26. Three diets were tested, including a natural rodent diet Teklad ENVIGO Global 16% Protein Rodent Diet (control 1), a formulated NEAA-complete diet COMPLETE (control 2, using amino acid mix in place of protein), and a formulated NEAA-deprived diet FTN203 (treatment, using amino acid mix in place of protein). Both COMPLETE and FTN203 have the same nutritional structures, contain 17% w/w protein equivalent, and are isocaloric. After tumor size-based randomization, these diets were provided to mice ad libitum throughout the whole test. Each of these diets was used alone or combined with anti-PD-1 antibody (i.p., twice per week for 2 weeks) or anti-PD-L1 antibody (i.v., twice per week for 2 weeks).

Explanation:

Answer 2

Answer:

i did it

Explanation:

The federal government can very much strip the supreme court of jurisdiction in the cases in Guantanamo bay. The basis of this would be if the senate wrote up a bill having the court's decision negated/removed by a bill and having the president of the united state to sign the bill into effect. In this scenario, these actions would ultimately promote the separation of power because of the executive branch and the legislative branches' checks and balances against the judicial branch. This would be constitutional because the constitution allows a supreme court ruling to be negated with a bill. That would be passed by the other two branches.