The government cannot prevent speech or publication before it happens (except in extreme cases).
"Prior restraint" means that the government cannot prevent or prohibit speech (or publication of something before it can be published), unless the content clearly can be shown to present an identifiable danger to public safety.
For the government to take such measures--blocking a form of speech or communication before it is allowed to happen--the form of speech must be such that it would clearly pose a threat of extreme danger to the community -- or might cause severe risks to national security. An example of the second sort of "prior restraint" claim happened in 1971, when the US government tried to block the <em>New York Times </em>and the <em>Washington Post </em>from publishing classified documents which were known as "The Pentagon Papers," regarding government handling of the Vietnam War. In that case, the Supreme Court decided, in <em>New York Times Company v. United States, </em>that the government's concern for security did not override the 1st Amendment rights of the news media to publish the information which they had received. The Court did not agree that the release of the government information would cause inevitable, specific, immediate danger to the United States. <em> </em>So you can see, proving the need for "prior restraint" is a very high bar to get across, and 1st Amendment rights usually prevail.
One way in which Emperor Meiji of Japan and Kemal Atatürk of Turkey are similar is that they both "<span>(2) worked to modernize their nations" but in very different.</span>
Answer:
D. The scriptures of both religions include the Tanakh.
Explanation:
The Tanakh is the collection of religious scriptures in Judaism. These texts are written in Biblical Hebrew, and are extremely important for Jews. Moreover, these texts also provide the basis for the Christian Old Testament. This means that the Tanakh is important for the scriptures of both religions.
Answer for your first question:
- Separation of powers refers to each branch of government having their own distinct powers, while checks and balances refers to the ability of each branch to prevent another branch from becoming too powerful.
For your second question:
Read more on Brainly.com - brainly.com/question/8033338#readmore
<em>[Proper form on Brainly is to ask just one question per post.]</em>
<u>Explanation in regard to your first question:</u>
The "separation of powers" principle was an idea embedded into the plans for American government by our founding fathers, based on their reading of Enlightenment political theory. The terminology "separation of powers" was introduced by Charles-Louis de Secondat, the Baron of Montesquieu. (Usually he's referred to as just "Montesquieu.") He wrote an important work of political theory called <em>The Spirit of the Laws</em>, published in 1748.
Within his treatment of how governments will function best, Montesquieu argued that executive, legislative, and judicial functions of government ought to be divided between parts of the government, so that no one person or division of the government can infringe on the overall rights of others in the government or of the members of the society overall. The framers of the United States Constitution embedded the separation of powers into the plan for US government.
As noted by <em>The History Channel, </em> "In addition to this separation of powers, the framers built a system of checks and balances designed to guard against tyranny by ensuring that no branch would grab too much power." Some examples of the checks and balances used would be:
- Congress (the Legislative Branch) controls the government's budget, so the Executive Branch needs Congress's support to fund any of its desired initiatives.
- The President nominates federal officials, but those nominations must be confirmed by the Senate.
- The President has the ability to veto laws passed by Congress, requiring a two-thirds majority to override his veto.
- The Supreme Court and other federal courts (the Judicial Branch of government) can rule that laws passed by Congress or executive orders by the President are unconstitutional, blocking their implementation.
Rebirth after death, sometimes based on performance in a previous life.
