Answer:
Article III, section 1 states that “[t]he judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.” The judges presiding over such courts must be appointed by the president “by and with the advice and consent of the Senate” and hold their offices “during good behavior[.]” Their salaries cannot be reduced. Operating under its Article I, section 8 power to “constitute” federal tribunals, Congress has created several courts staffed by judges holding these protections who exercise the “judicial power” contemplated in Article III. These courts are commonly known as “Article III” or “constitutional” courts. The latter moniker can be confusing, as the Constitution does not oblige Congress to create any particular court and such courts routinely hear non-constitutional disputes.
article l
The federal court system has three main levels: district courts (the trial court), circuit courts which are the first level of appeal, and the Supreme Court of the United States, the final level of appeal in the federal system. There are 94 district courts, 13 circuit courts, and one Supreme Court throughout the country.
Courts in the federal system work differently in many ways than state courts. The primary difference for civil cases (as opposed to criminal cases) is the types of cases that can be heard in the federal system. Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction, meaning they can only hear cases authorized by the United States Constitution or federal statutes. The federal district court is the starting point for any case arising under federal statutes, the Constitution, or treaties. This type of jurisdiction is called “original jurisdiction.” Sometimes, the jurisdiction of state courts will overlap with that of federal courts, meaning that some cases can be brought in both courts. The plaintiff has the initial choice of bringing the case in state or federal court. However, if the plaintiff chooses state court, the defendant may sometimes choose to “remove” to federal court.
Cases that are entirely based on state law may be brought in federal court under the court’s “diversity jurisdiction.” Diversity jurisdiction allows a plaintiff of one state to file a lawsuit in federal court when the defendant is located in a different state. The defendant can also seek to “remove” from state court for the same reason. To bring a state law claim in federal court, all of the plaintiffs must be located in different states than all of the defendants, and the “amount in controversy” must be more than $75,000. (Note: the rules for diversity jurisdiction are much more complicated than explained here.)
Criminal cases may not be brought under diversity jurisdiction. States may only bring criminal prosecutions in state courts, and the federal government may only bring criminal prosecutions in federal court. Also important to note, the principle of double jeopardy – which does not allow a defendant to be tried twice for the same charge – does not apply between the federal and state government. If, for example, the state brings a murder charge and does not get a conviction, it is possible for the federal government in some cases to file charges against the defendant if the act is also illegal under federal law.
Federal judges (and Supreme Court “justices”) are selected by the President and confirmed “with the advice and consent” of the Senate and “shall hold their Offices during good Behavior.” Judges may hold their position for the rest of their lives, but many resign or retire earlier. They may also be removed by impeachment by the House of Representatives and conviction by the Senate. Throughout history, fourteen federal judges have been impeached due to alleged wrongdoing. One exception to the lifetime appointment is for magistrate judges, which are selected by district judges and serve a specified term.
Góogle is the best
Which of the following is an example of why culture changes?
a
All of these
b
Discovery
c
Diffusion
d
Invention
Extraversion, neuroticism, and psychoticism are three higher-order traits that make up Eysenck's higher-order traits.
Answer:
It is TRUE
Explanation:
Correct on EDGE 2020.
Read the passage, then answer the question that follows.
Scientists have studied the benefits of hobbies having a pastime reduces stress. It can improve mood, help memory, and strengthen friendships. Relaxing hobbies such as knitting or bird-watching reduce cortisone, the stress hormone. Some hobbies, such as sports and clubs, encourage friendships, and numerous studies have found a connection between relationships and happiness.
Which revision best corrects the underlined sentence?
Scientists have studied the benefits of hobbies. Having a pastime reduces stress.
Scientists have studied the benefits of hobbies, having a pastime reduces stress.
Scientists have studied the benefits of hobbies, but having a pastime reduces stress.
Scientists have studied the benefits of hobbies; however, having a pastime reduces stress.
Answer:
Scientists have studied the benefits of hobbies. Having a pastime reduces stress.
Scientists have studied the benefits of hobbies. Having a pastime reduces stress.
What are Scientists?An expert who conducts and gathers research to advance knowledge in a particular field is referred to as a scientist. Scientists may develop hypotheses, test them using a variety of tools, including data and statistics, and then draw conclusions based on the results.
There are many different kinds of scientists, and almost every sector of the economy needs the expertise and research that these experts provide.
Almost every company employs scientists. Scientists operate in a range of sectors and specialize in different types of study, from business to teaching to regulation. We shall examine what a scientist is, what they do, and the various types of scientists in this post.
Therefore, Scientists have studied the benefits of hobbies. Having a pastime reduces stress.
To learn more about Scientist, refer to the link:
https://brainly.com/question/17450573
#SPJ5
If blue is coded as black and black is coded as white and white is coded as green then what is the color of the grass?
Answer:
Blue color.
Explanation:
Given -
Blue color is coded as black. Thus, Blue color is equal to black color.
Black color is coded as white. Thus, black color is equal to white color
White color is coded as green. Thus white color is okay to green.
Green color = white color = black color = blue color.
The color of grass is blue.
Which type of reactor is designed to produce new nuclear fuel by transforming waste into fissionable material?
A)
breeder reactors
B)
pebble-bed reactors
C)
fusion reactors
D)
fission reactors
E)
burner reactors
Answer:
A) breeder reactors
Explanation:
right on edg
The type of reactor that is designed to produce new nuclear fuel by transforming waste into fissionable material is known as a breeder reactor. Thus, the correct option for this question is A.
What is Nuclear fuel?Nuclear fuel may be defined as a type of fuel that is significantly utilized in a nuclear reactor in order to sustain a nuclear chain reaction. Such types of fuels are fissile. Examples of the most common nuclear fuels may include the radioactive metals uranium-235 and plutonium-239.
Breeder reactors are nuclear reactor that effectively produces more fissionable material than it consumes to generate energy through the help of nuclear chain reaction. This special type of reactor is designed to extend the supply of nuclear fuel for electric power generation.
Therefore, the type of reactor that is designed to produce new nuclear fuel by transforming waste into fissionable material is known as a breeder reactor. Thus, the correct option for this question is A.
To learn more about Nuclear reactors, refer to the link:
https://brainly.com/question/14400638
#SPJ6
Explain the relationship between moral understanding and the standard of right action?
Answer:
Morality is a set of principles and values that belongs to the actions and behaviors of individuals that influence others. Thus, it encourages each individual to behave in such a way that it does not negatively affect others, tending to act in accordance with the common good and without relapsing into negative behaviors for society in general.
In turn, morality is the main component that determines the behavioral standards that govern individuals and societies, since these behaviors must be consistent with the concept of ethics and moral correctness.
"1. We ask absolutely complete political independence for Syria.
3. Considering the fact that the Arabs inhabiting the Syrian
area are not naturally less gifted than other more advanced
races and that they are by no means less developed than the
Bulgarians, Serbians, Greeks, and Roumanians at the begin-
ning of their independence, we protest against Article 22 of
the Covenant of the League of Nations, placing us among the
nations in their middle stage of development which stand in
need of a mandatory power."
Memorandum of the General Syrian
Congress, July 2, 1919
7. Which of the following can be inferred based on the
passage above?
(A) Enlightenment ideals, such as self-determination,
had spread beyond Europe and the Americas.
(B) Self-determination was only possible within the
secure context of an empire.
(C) Most Syrians in 1919 identified themselves as
French nationals.
(D) Arabs were no longer the majority in their own
homelands.
Answer: (A) Enlightenment ideals, such as self-determination, had spread beyond Europe and the Americas.
Explanation:
Enlightenment ideas such as self-determination started in Europe and then spread to the Americas and led to the overthrow of kingdoms and colonial governments as natives wanted to rule themselves.
This excerpt shows that these ideas had spread beyond their epicentres of Europe and America to other areas which in this case is Syria. The Syrians were partitioning the League of Nations to grant them a right to rule their own selves showing that they subscribed to the enlightenment idea of self-determination.
Explain the difference between push marketing campaigns and pull marketing campaigns, using examples of each.
should. municipal officials rethink policies of offering incentives two companies to entice them to relocate
Explanation:
Amazon’s decision to walk away from its plan to build a new headquarters in Queens stunned city and state officials, who had promised $3 billion in incentives in exchange for some 25,000 jobs. They had never questioned whether the promised jobs and economic stimulus would actually appear. In my own research as an economist studying corporate welfare, I have found and reviewed much evidence on the effectiveness of tax and other incentives. My conclusion: Incentives just don’t work.That’s in part because companies aren’t obligated to follow through on their promises. Just ask Boston. In February, around the same time Amazon walked away from its NYC plans, General Electric announced it will cut back on jobs and investment in its new headquarters in Boston. Only three years ago, the company’s plan to relocate from Connecticut in exchange for $25 million in tax breaks was touted as a big deal for Boston. Or consider General Motors, which in 2012 said it would build a new electric vehicle facility in White Marsh, Maryland, after receiving a subsidy of $105 million from the U.S. Department of Energy, $6 million in grants from Baltimore County, and $4.5 million in state grants for economic development and job training. This past November, the automaker announced it will shut down the plant as part of a restructuring effort. Or Foxconn. In 2017, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker announced that the electronics giant would build a new factory in the state. The $10 billion investment was supposed to create as many as 13,000 jobs housed on a high-tech campus the size of 11 Lambeau football fields. Walker, who was described, during the announcement, as “a picture of grinning, fist-pumping excitement,” offered more than $4 billion in tax incentives in return. With only 178 jobs created as of January, now the plans for a large factory to build large TV screens are in doubt. Instead, Foxconn said it plans to work on a research and development facility in the state. And for those that do stay, the benefits to the city or region aren’t all that great. A 2016 study by economist Carlianne Patrick compared counties that won large new factories with those that lost out during the bidding process. She found that they typically did not generate more revenue for the local government than it spent on incentives, even if they did induce small increases in economic activity. Another study by Patrick found that making it easier for local governments to offer aid to companies reduced employment in rural counties. And in 2018, the W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research concluded that factories and offices that received an incentive had employment growth 3.7% slower than those that didn’t receive the inducement. More than that, a review of 30 different studies by the Upjohn Institute found that incentives actually influence a company’s decision to invest in less than a quarter of cases. In other words, most of the time, a company would have made the investment with or without the tax break or other incentive. In my own study, I collected data on 82 companies that invested in new plants and factories across the U.S. from 1982 to 1993 and then tracked them for a couple of decades. I also collected data on the various tax incentives and other inducement policies each state offered. As of 2010, when the last data were available, 52 were still in operation. Twenty-four of them closed. I couldn’t find data on the other six. The point of providing companies with tax incentives and other subsidies is that they are supposed to lead to economic growth and make a facility more viable. On the contrary, I found that the plants in states with higher tax incentives were actually slightly more likely to have gone out of business by 2010. What is going on here? My theory, based on other research I’ve conducted, is that a company that is offered a large incentive package is incentivized to build a plant or office early rather than doing sufficient due diligence to ensure the decision is the best one. Another possibility is tied to politics: The company wants to ink the deal and secure the subsidy while the governor who offered the deal is still in office. That appears to have happened in Wisconsin, where Walker lost his reelection the year after he offered Foxconn the large subsidies. It is striking that Amazon, in announcing its cancellation of the New York headquarters, didn’t signal it was reopening the bidding process for one of its new headquarters. Nowhere did it say that it would still hire the 25,000 workers it had said it would in New York City, though it still plans to create that many jobs in Virginia. While Amazon said it pulled out because of political opposition, another reason may be that the lure of the subsidies blinded Amazon to economic realities and that it’s second-guessing its investment. In which case, perhaps Amazon should count its blessings as well.
What is a serious criticism of the principle of utility?
1) It can test moral rules but not individual acts
2) It sometimes leads to the ruling of the majority
3) It supports ethical relativism
4) It can test individual acts but not moral rules
Questions 13 and 14 / AP Stats
Answer:Can't understand the question
Explanation:
2. When do judge overrides increase and for what reason?
answer:
Judge overrides increased during death sentences because they were rare. Every state except Florida and Alabama the juries made the decision to impose the death penalty or life in prison without parole.
Explanation:
this was found on quizlet
AP Psychology 2008 free-response