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.
Hello there
the answer is
It seems to me that those cultures which have an oral rather than a written tradition have rather sophisticated ways of memorising certain things. Many of them are strongly attached to land which is the basis of not only their livelihood, but also their spiritual beliefs.
Basically, from my limited understanding, the land then acts as a “map” for many things, from the surrounding geography through to a “map” of their spiritual beliefs. As land has lots of identifying markers, this then acts as an aid to remembering most details of the lives of people from such cultural traditions.
The tragedy of the commons occurs where property rights are lacking.
In economics, the tragedy of the commons is the situation in which individual users, who have free access to resources, are not bound by shared social structures or rules. officially govern access and use, acting independently in their own interest and contrary to general principles. common interests of all users, causing resource depletion due to their uncoordinated actions.
The concept originated in an essay written in 1833 by the British economist William Forster Lloyd, who used a hypothetical example of the impact of unregulated grazing on the region. common land in Great Britain and Ireland.
To know more about tragedy of the commons here-
brainly.com/question/29221557
#SPJ4
Answer:
They took them to concentration camps. If they were small children or pregnant women, they were usually told that they would be taking a shower, when in reality they were taken to the gas chambers and gassed immediately. If not, they were forced to do hard labor and often do shameful things for entertainment.
Answer:
to deliver electric shocks to a learner for giving incorrect answers
Explanation:
The Milgram obedience studies also known as the Milgram Shock Experiment was conducted at the Yale University which focused on the investigation of obedience to authority and personal conscience and that to what extent the participants are ready to go to be considered obedient. Stanley Milgram divided participants into teachers and learners and order the participants to deliver electric shocks to a learner for giving incorrect answers. This was a highly controversial research however, it highlighted the personal want for acceptance and reward in human beings.
