Advantage---Loose constructionists tend to uphold civil rights and liberties. Judicially active, loose constructionist judges such as Ruth Bader Ginsburg tend to dissent in cases which infringe civil liberties such as Salinas v Texas (2013) and agree with rulings that don't e.g. 2015 Same sex rulingAdvantage---Loose constructionists often protect minorities, especially those incompatible with Congress or the executive. This is because loose constructionists are not scared to overturn laws or actions made by Congress or the executive e.g. Brown v Board of EducationDisadvantage---Loose constructionists tend to be judicially active, which has fuelled arguments on the politicisation of the Court. They 'legislate from the bench' by striking down laws as unconstitutional. This is undemocratic and elitist, as they have mandate from the electorateDisadvantage---Loose constructionists tend to be too sensitive to public opinion, which could hamper the neutrality and independence of the Court. However, some public support is necessary to maintain the authority of the Court.
I should say false! Many Asian products are actually doing very well in the Western markets!
The answer is believe is C because the state wants to protect the citizens and the state itself
The Triple Entente: <span>Britain, France, Russia
</span><span>The Triple Alliance: </span>Germany, Austria-Hungary, Italy. (However, Italy's membership was meaningless and Italy fought alongside the Entente from April 1915)
<span>The Ottoman Empire, which fought alongside the Central Powers (from September 1914 on, was not a member of either.
</span><span>The US, which entered the war on the side of the Triple Entente was also not a member of either.</span>
