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.
Answer:
Certain Pennsylvania assembly members opposed the bill because they worried that the “pernicious consequences” of gradual abolition may impact their neighboring states and weaken the war effort. ... Connecticut's gradual abolition act stated that all children born into slavery could obtain their freedom by the age of 25.
Answer:Sostradus,Polyidus
Explanation: ps if you can please help with questions on my page
To add strength to their army by shutting off any American ports.
