Answer:
Because of John Marshall, the Supreme Court can review the constitutionality of federal laws that allegedly contradict the Constitution of the United States. This arises from the ruling in Marbury v. Madison, written by Chief Justice Marshall.
Explanation:
Marbury v. Madison is the most significant precedent of the Supreme Court, which gave the power to oversee the constitutionality of laws, as well as to protect the human rights and freedoms of citizens guaranteed by the Constitution.
In this matter, the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is established in cases where there are differing opinions of appellate courts, when a federal law is being evaluated, and especially when a constitutional issue is raised.
In this way, this ruling modified the system of "checks and balances", allowing the federal judiciary to control legislative and executive power in certain cases. This specific power of the judiciary is not enshrined in the Constitution, but has been put into practice through judicial review. It implies the right of courts to declare invalid and to repeal acts of executive and legislative power (both of the President and of Congress) which are considered contrary to the Constitution. The Supreme Court, through judicial review, cannot amend the Constitution, but can only interpret and apply it in a manner it deems appropriate.
D a subcommittee holds public hearings on the bill.
Answer:General Knowledge
Explanation:
General knowledge, an essential aspect of crystallized intelligence associated with intelligence gained from experience is information that has been accumulated over time through combination of various mediums it includes specialized learning that is obtained with extensive training and information through different sources.
The knowledge Marcelo is using that reminds him to focus his attention, block out distractions, and think about what he is reading if he wants to understand any of his high school subjects is a General Knowledge which he must have acquired from experience accumulated over time to help him read better.
<span>In the Elstad case the court ruled that
the suspect’s statement that put him in the act, or admitted guilt was unsolicited. He was taken to the station and Maranda
before he gave a second statement.
During the questioning of Seibert, five days after the act, the officer
questioned her for 30 to 40 minutes obtaining a confession that caused a death
in the fire of her trailer. After taking
a 20 minute break the officer came back, read the Maranda and obtained a signed
waiver. Then got another statement. The
District Court suppressed the prewarning statement but admitted the post
warning one, and Seibert was convicted of second-degree murder. The Missouri
Court of Appeals affirmed, finding the case indistinguishable from Oregon
v. Elstad,
in which this Court held that a suspect's
unwarned inculpatory statement made during a brief exchange at his house did
not make a later, fully warned inculpatory statement inadmissible. In
reversing, the State Supreme Court held that, because the interrogation was
nearly continuous, the second statement, which was clearly the product of the
invalid first statement, should be suppressed; and distinguished Elstad
on the ground that the warnings had not intentionally been withheld</span>
Answer: The influence of church and social media to us young people is. Church can help you trough things and it helps you create a bond with people because everyone thats in that specific room with you all believe the same thing but everyone knows the bible a little different.While social media can be dangerous people might not see it but it can cause some serious harm to one person, And your "friends" on social media most of the time we dont know them,That can be a bit dangerous as well.
Explanation:
