Means the speaker will never fight if he can get it by assaulting people and will never assault people if he can make them understand what he say.
Answer:
Judicial review is the power of the courts to declare that acts of the other branches of government are unconstitutional, and thus unenforceable. For example if Congress were to pass a law banning newspapers from printing information about certain political matters, courts would have the authority to rule that this law violates the First Amendment, and is therefore unconstitutional. State courts also have the power to strike down their own state’s laws based on the state or federal constitutions.
Today, we take judicial review for granted. In fact, it is one of the main characteristics of government in the United States. On an almost daily basis, court decisions come down from around the country striking down state and federal rules as being unconstitutional. Some of the topics of these laws in recent times include same sex marriage bans, voter identification laws, gun restrictions, government surveillance programs and restrictions on abortion.
Other countries have also gotten in on the concept of judicial review. A Romanian court recently ruled that a law granting immunity to lawmakers and banning certain types of speech against public officials was unconstitutional. Greek courts have ruled that certain wage cuts for public employees are unconstitutional. The legal system of the European Union specifically gives the Court of Justice of the European Union the power of judicial review. The power of judicial review is also afforded to the courts of Canada, Japan, India and other countries. Clearly, the world trend is in favor of giving courts the power to review the acts of the other branches of government.
However, it was not always so. In fact, the idea that the courts have the power to strike down laws duly passed by the legislature is not much older than is the United States. In the civil law system, judges are seen as those who apply the law, with no power to create (or destroy) legal principles. In the (British) common law system, on which American law is based, judges are seen as sources of law, capable of creating new legal principles, and also capable of rejecting legal principles that are no longer valid. However, as Britain has no Constitution, the principle that a court could strike down a law as being unconstitutional was not relevant in Britain. Moreover, even to this day, Britain has an attachment to the idea of legislative supremacy. Therefore, judges in the United Kingdom do not have the power to strike down legislation.
Explanation:
nationalparalegal.edu /JudicialReview.aspx
Answer:
<h3>this provision contains the essence of right to privacy of an individual from state and government.</h3>
Explanation:
- There is<u> no clear definition to the right to privacy</u> in the American Constitution. However, in the Fourth Amendment, there is a provision which advocates to <u>protect the privacy of a person and possessions from any unreasonable searches.</u>
- Advocates of the right to privacy believes that <u>this provision contains the essence of right to privacy of an individual from state and government. </u>Furthermore, the advocates also refer to the Ninth Amendment as the <u>amendment states that rights provided in the Bill of Rights should not be be construed to deny or disparage other rights retained by the people.</u>
- With reference to the Ninth Amendment, the advocates of right to privacy establishes that right to privacy cannot be altered or taken away by the government.
Answer:
Astronomers and telescopic evidence
Explanation:
Question asking:
Which connection helps the reader understand how supermassive black holes were found?
Answer:
Astronomers and telescopic evidence
Explanation for answer:
Since the passage given that Astronomers found stars careening around these centers, zooming at previously unheard-of speeds in their orbits and telescopic evidence confirmed the amazing cause: a supermassive black hole, with the mass not of one imploded star, not of two, but of millions – maybe even billions.
Thus, base on the given we can know that telescopic evidence confirmed the amazing cause: a supermassive black hole so the only answer with telescopic evidence and astronomers is [B] astronomers and telescopic evidence
<u><em>~Lenvy~</em></u>
