Why did the farmers of the constitution 33 separate branches of the national government?

Social Studies

1 answer:

Anon25 [30]3 years ago

3 0

The framers did not want any one branch to become despotic and authoritative.

Explanation:

The forerunners of the constitution formulated two-house legislature and the government comprises of three different offices, they are Legislature, executive and judiciary. Each office is conferred with different and various set of responsibilities and the system of supervising and regulating authority.

The representatives declared that no segment of the government administration becomes forceful and persuasive while exercising powers and the each division could keep a discerning eye on the operative methodologies of the other two divisions which would make the whole system unprejudiced and impartial while executing public policies.

You might be interested in

Which of the following situations is an example of voting fraud?

Leona [35]

I think the answer is B

4 0

2 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Why do you think romans traded for horses and wild animals

koban [17]

The romans most likely traded for horses and wild animals because it could provide them with meat and along that they could also use it for trade

7 0

3 years ago

What kind of business would be good for the children if I give in my neighborhood? (for example, “daycare”

Kay [80]

Playground Tutoring Daycare

3 0

3 years ago

A researcher studying small-town religiosity in the United States randomly selected 10 states. From these states, he randomly se

ANTONII [103]

Answer: The practitioners are not part of a cluster.

Explanation: A cluster is a group of things or people that share similar characteristics. In practitioner's case they come from different states, counties, cities, and houses of worship (professing a different religion) so they have nothing in common.

5 0

3 years ago

In the case Schenk v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution does not protect a person when "falsely shout

Ket [755]

Answer:

<h3>Freedom of speech.</h3>

Explanation:

Freedom of speech is a principal that advocates the freedom of a person to state his/her opinion freely and to impart information and ideas without any restrictions.

However, in the case of Schenk v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution does not protect a person when "falsely shouting fire in a theater and causing panic" because freedom of speech does not protect speech that has the potential to incite danger and disharmony in the society.
Therefore, in the case of Schenk v. United States, freedom of speech of First Amendment was limited.

6 0

3 years ago