<u>Answer:</u>
<em>These passages differ in their ideas about the Magnusson fishery and conservation act in the sense that the first author warns that the act is insufficient, while the second author argues that it may be too strict. (D)</em>
<em />
<u>Explanation:</u>
Both the authors have given different perspectives and shared distinct opinions on the Magnusson act. There are different facts and figures which have been put forward by both the writers supporting respective opinions. The later considers this act and its regulations may affect fisheries and its overall supply while the former considers this act as an insufficient one.
Why waste 10 points to make this?
Also, did you know that time is only a conception of the mind?
Nxnxndn I got to the shower and I’m sorry I’m just
Answer and Explanation:
Parties who are not being satisfied with a lower court's decision must file a petition to the U.S. Court to hear case.
Then participate Justices divide their petitions among the law clerks. In return, the law clerk read the petitions which are being allotted to them. Then they write a brief memorandum about the case. And make a recommendation if the case should be accepted or not.
After the initial petitions have been filed, the petitioner and respondent are authorized to file briefs of a shorter length.
Then oral arguments are taken place. Then the procedure is more modified. When oral arguments are ended, the Justices need to decide the case.
During the last week, opinion days are being held.
