The answer is C. Hoped this helped <3
Answer:
D. a loose interpretation of the Constitution could be used to increase federal power.
Explanation:
John Marshall was the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States from 1801 till his death in 1835. Without any prior study in law, he studied law in only just six weeks.
Under Supreme Court's decision under Chief Justice John Marshall upheld Alexander Hamilton's interpretation of the Constitution. Alexander Hamilton advocated broad and liberal interpretation of the Constitution. This belief was upheld by the Supreme Court under Chief Justice John Marshall. The Supreme Court uphelded a loose and liberal interpretation of the Constitution could be used to increase federal power.
Therefore, option D is correct.
Answer:
If this is a true or false question then the answer is false
there are many ways a trial can still be had; here is one example...
Explanation:
A murder conviction without a body is an instance of a person being convicted of murder despite the absence of the victim's body. Circumstantial and forensic evidence are prominent in such convictions. ... In all cases, unless otherwise noted, the remains of the victims were never recovered.
hope this helps :)
may I get brainliest please?
Answer:
Yes, law enforcement can use the recording in court because it is a direct personal threat.
Explanation:
Pat is threatening Terry with violence and possible murder, which is impiled when Pat said "No one will ever find your body". This can be used in court to support Terry's case that Pat has or could become violent and hurt Terry at some point.
Answer:
A lobbyist is a professional whose job is to make contacts with influential people in Washington (or whatever government) and make a case on behalf of a client. They're regulated under the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995. If you're spending most of your time chatting with Congressmen, then you need to file forms saying who you're talking to and on whose behalf. These forms are filed with the clerks in the House and the Senate.
While a Political Action Committee (PAC) is a group of people with some kind of interest. They collect money and spend it to promote that interest. They have to file forms, with the Federal Election Commission rather than with the legislative branch, though unlike the lobbyists they have ways to not disclose who's giving them money. They can hold public meetings, buy TV advertising, donate money to causes, give money to candidates (a small amount- about $5k to candidates and $15k to parties), and hire lobbyists.
Generally, when a PAC hires a lobbyist, the lobbyist is the one to go to the legislator and make the case on behalf of the PAC. They may also bring the PAC's own team to make the presentation, but they need to be very careful about crossing the (byzantine) set of rules trying to keep the ethical lines clear-ish. Conceivably, they could have lobbyists on staff, but it exposes the entire organization to levels of disclosure that they'd generally rather not have. Thus, the usual plan is for a PAC to hire an established lobbying firm, who is already registered and prepared to handle the paperwork.
Explanation:
Hope this helped :)