true, although he did a little bit for civil rights, he was responsible for japenese internment camps which were pretty screwed up
The correct answer is: violation of individual liberties, and the violation of the national and international laws.
As much as the government has plausible for doing it so, as we look back at the history of terrorist attacks, the government would argue the indefinite detention without, considering it aa form of prevention. If we know the human rights we will realize the most viable and obvious argument for being against that type of detention is the violation of national and international laws about the individual liberties. That's when there is no evidence of crime and when the individual does not represent national threat. It may be controversial the way government tries to deal with issues like that, but international organizations has made very clear their points about
Suburb? Can you specify please?
Answer:
From undermining war effort or speaking bad against the government
Explanation:
The espionage act of 1917 and the Sedition act of 1918, made every disloyal or abusive language against the u items states military and government a criminal offense.
The president was afraid that a ti war speeches would undermine the efforts they were putting in at the war. The act also targeted socialists, anarchists, pacifists. Any one who violated could spend up to 29byears in prison and fine 10000 dollars
