Assuming that this is referring to the same list of options that was posted before with this question, <span>the correct response would be the one having to do with Mesopotamia being far more tolerant that Egypt, since Egypt faced far more religious uprisings. </span>
Answer: As in the clauses: Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3:
“Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.”
They counted slaves as less than one person, the "other person" are slaves. The "excluding Indians not taxed" part, means that they were considered part of US only if they paid the taxes.
In the event of isolation during operations other than war, the reasons to delay contact with legitimate authorities include:
1.Gain situational awareness
2.Contact friendly forces
Answer:
O. Periodic appointments would destroy a judge's independence.
Explanation:
Alexander Hamilton wrote in his "Federalist Papers No. 78" how the independence of judges is important for the security of everyone. Stating that <em>"the general liberty of the people can never be endangered .... so long as the judiciary remains truly distinct from both the legislature and the Executive"</em>. He further went to demand that <em>"independence of the judges is equally requisite to guard the Constitution and the rights of individuals"</em>. He believes that independence of the judiciary from either the legislative or executive is a much needed act, for it will ensure the right and correct implementation of judgement. He proposed that <em>"complete independence of the courts of justice is peculiarly essential in a limited Constitution"</em>.
Moreover, judges' permanent appointment will ensure the rightful passing of judgement which can be flawed if the judges are appointed periodically. For no two persons are the same, so this may lead to differences in opinions which will lead to the former judgement being recanted by the next person appointed. Thus, he opines that <em>"periodical appointments, however regulated, or by whomsoever made, would, in some way or other, be fatal to their necessary independence"</em>.
Thus, the correct answer is the third option.
