Answer:
Practically the entirety of the cases that the Supreme Court hears are cases that are on allure. The Supreme Court has unique purview over a not many cases, however these are very uncommon. This implies that the Supreme Court is quite often hearing situations where just matters of law are at issue (instead of issues of certainty). The Supreme Court is essentially, in those cases, attempting to choose if the law (regardless of whether rule law or the Constitution) has been effectively applied.
Explanation:
Cases heard by the Supreme Court for the most part include significant and troublesome issues of law. Cases that are not significant, or where the law is self evident, don't make it as far as possible up the stepping stool to the Supreme Court.
Thus, the cases the Court hears are those that include significant and troublesome inquiries of law. It hears those cases either after they have come up through the government court framework or after they have been chosen by the high court of a state.
I believe the answer is A
Answer: John Locke
Explanation:
John Locke was perhaps the foremost philosopher of the Enlightenment. He believed that a government was legitimate only if the people it ruled consented to its authority. He also believed the government should protect the natural rights of citizens and that all individuals should be equal under the law.
b. ability to communicate the party platform clearly
