Explanation:
Law does not function in vacuum. Law operates for and in the society; and it is influenced by the mores and attitudes of the society. Correspondingly, law is an instrument of social change. The law thus never can be static; it has to change constantly with the changes in the society. Judiciary plays a major role for this change since judges interpret and redefine the laws through their judicial decisions. The demands of the time and society become prominent factors for judge in the law interpretation process. Their judicial opinions consequently become precedents - 'settled' or 'established' law that can provide legal foundation for settling subsequent cases. Hence, those who are associated in the field of law have to read case judgments for their research or academic purposes.
Mere knowledge of legal rules is not enough to do research in law. It also needs the analytical skills to extract ratio, observation and to apply these principles in different factual situations. This paper endeavors to identify certain parameters, which by no means are exhaustive but are only enabling points which could help a researcher to read and understand the judicial opinion. To achieve the very purposes of reading, the yardstick is not mere the ability to read, but to comprehend very essence of what is written.
The author believes that when a judgment is written well with clarity and consistency, even a common man would be able to figure out the contours of law. Since the objective of any judgment or judicial opinion is justice, the judge's conveying skill and the reader's skill ought to converge upon a common end.
The 5th Amendment states that "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation"
This is important as it means that, amongst other things, the Government can't make you provide testimony against yourself.
For instance, in Rochin v. California, the Supreme Court held that cops couldn't beat you until you vomited up the drugs you swallowed to hide from the cops. They ruled that the police officers violated the suspect's 5th amendment rights.
Answer:
I believe the correct response to this question is "the Fifth Amendment"
Explanation:
Answer: Mexico
Explanation: Mexico declared independence from Spain on September 16, 1810, 11 years before the other three countries listed
Answer: oh oh, I know!
Du Bois attributed the intense opposition to the Bureau to what he referred to as the “American Assumption” that “wealth is mainly the result of its owner's effort and that any average worker can by thrift become a capitalist.”
BRAINLIEST would help very much :D
Explanation:
