Answer:
<u>Photos</u><u> </u>hung on the <u>East and West</u> sides of the Great Hall balcony in the Ellis Island<u> immigration facility</u><u>.</u>
Explanation:
The Great Hall in Ellis Island was an immigration facility in the United States used by immigrants between 1900- 1924. Here, <u>photos</u> from the early 1920s hung at the <u>balcony</u> on the <u>East and West</u> sides of the <u>registry room </u>located on the<u> second floor</u> of the building.
Notably, at the entry point of the peak immigration, large portraits were hunged on the walls.
For over two decades (1900-1924) immigration service officers inspected legal and medical examinations for the new arrivals of new immigrants.
I think the answer is b because most woman back then had no rights at all
Answer:
The decisions in Miranda v. Arizona, Gideon v. Wainwright, and Mapp v. Ohio are very important to defendants in criminal proceedings today because they enlarged defendants' rights in criminal trials and investigations.
Thus, Miranda v. Arizona refers to the fact that those accused of a crime must know their rights prior to being questioned by the police, that is, that everything they say can be used against them and that they have the right to consult a lawyer.
For its part, Gideon v. Wainwright guaranteed the defendants the right to have a lawyer, even when they could not afford it on their own financial means. In this way, a defendant is not left legally unprotected for not being able to afford a lawyer, since it is the state that grants him one for free.
Finally, Mapp v. Ohio prohibits the use of illegitimately obtained evidence in criminal proceedings. Thus, non-compliance with the Fourth Amendment (and the consequent search without a warrant) renders the evidence obtained in this way not admissible in court.
