I believe the answer is a) was ruled unconstitutional
Answer:
That statement is false
Explanation:
It's the other way around. Their research shows that when the canadians put in the same situation, their judgement regarding acts of violence actually similar and consistent with the judgement made by the americans.
(this research finding is a little bit surprising because Canadians are more well known to have a more polite and gentle culture)
In general , their judgement regarding acts of violence can be influenced by their primal human instincts.
For example, the research showed that:
- both canadians and Americans overwhelmingly approved that acts of violence are justifiable if being done toward people who are broken into their house.
- Both Canadians and Americans overwhelmingly disapproved of acts of violence toward group of protesters.
The answer is B saratoga.
Olivia, a citizen of nebraska, wants to file a suit against micah, a citizen of kansas. their diversity of citizenship may be a basis for a<u> "federal" </u>court to exercise jurisdiction.
Federal courts are set up under the U.S. Constitution to choose debate including the Constitution and laws gone by Congress.
Federal court jurisdiction, by differentiate, is restricted to the sorts of cases recorded in the Constitution and particularly accommodated by Congress. Generally, federal courts just hear:
Cases in which the United States is a gathering;
Cases including infringement of the U.S. Constitution or government laws (under administrative inquiry purview);
Cases between natives of various states if the sum in debate surpasses $75,000 (under decent variety purview); and Bankruptcy, copyright, patent, and sea law cases.
