Answer:
i think that they have just the right amount of rights depending on what they did if its something really ad as if there sentence is death penalty or life in prison they should have fewer but that's my opinion and i think it has gone positive.
Explanation:
Judicial restraint is the political theory that says courts shouldn't, unless absolutely required, issue rulings that broaden or alter the character of existing laws.
<h3>Justiciable constraint is exercised by whom?</h3>
A jurist (judge or justice) who upholds a philosophy of restraint can be described as one who considers democracy to have intrinsic, rather than just instrumental, value, that the judiciary is indeed the least powerful of the three branches of government, and who values stability and predictability in the lawmaking process.
<h3>Why do advocates of judicial restraint assert that judges are impervious to public sentiment?</h3>
They are freed from the strain of the outer world of public opinion since they do not have to worry about being reelected. In the end, the majority may not always be correct. The fact that the Founders established appointed judges and elected legislators is not by coincidence.
Learn more about Judicial restraint: brainly.com/question/29545866
#SPJ4
Answer:The correct answer is C
Explanation:
Answer:
Don't know too much about Law but I can say that M could sue under the common law theory of nuisance.
Explanation:
A nuisance occurs when an offending party acts in a way that interferes with another party's rights to use or enjoy their property. (Im only in 9th grade man I dont know too much but I hope this helps )
Answer: b. No, because the state acted as a market participant
Explanation:
The state in this instance was a market participant because they were acting as buyers who were looking for companies that could supply the service of exploiting their gas fields.
As a result, they have total discretion to pick whichever supplier they choose, regardless of the benefits or lack thereof, much like a normal buyer would do. The interstate company would therefore lose the case.
