The way to achieve this impartiality – to free judges to decide cases based on what the law actually requires, and on nothing else – is to ensure that the judiciary is independent, or, put differently, not subject to reprisals for decisions on the bench.
But judicial independence is not an absolute or singular value defining our courts. The principle of judicial restraint is equally important – and it is inextricably linked to judicial independence. At one level, the tension between the two seems inescapable. But there is an important sense in which an independent judiciary and judicial restraint are flip sides of the same coin. Both aim to minimize the influence of extraneous factors on judicial decision-making. A judge must not decide a case with an eye toward public approbation, because whether a particular result is popular is irrelevant to whether it is legally sound. In the same way, a judge must not consult
Answer:
I think it's B
Explanation:
the moon is what causes tides and with tides the water moves towards the moon. im not 100% sure. i hope this helps!
Answer: Have you ever wondered how fortunate the people are without a government? well i say they are pretty fortunate. i live in the united states and some of the laws are unfair. They put us in a role for god such as men going to jail if they put there hands on a women and as a female i can say that sometimes we do do some horrible things to men but we never expect for them to react because of that law and with that law we feel that we can do all types of things even hurt them when in an altercation but sometimes men can only take so much until they burst
this is what i have so far it needs to be corrected a little bit but its good
Channel Tunnel
or answer c is what you are looking for
1. France and Germany just could not get along.
2. Hitler became Chancellor of Germany and did not agree to any terms.
3. Hitler removed himself, and eventually started WW2
