1. Why did the Framers insist that federal judges be appointed for a lifetime of service? (1 point)
They wanted as little change as possible in the judicial branch.
They wanted to control the nominees of the president.
They wanted to avoid a continual appointment process.
They wanted judges to make decisions based upon the law and not public opinion.
2. Which of the following represents the judicial philosophy of deciding cases based upon precedent and the original intent of the Constitution?
(1 point)
judicial activism
judicial power
judicial restraint
judicial review
3. Which type of court would hear a case in which the U.S. Navy was sued? (1 point)
civilian court
federal court
military court
state court
4. Concurrent jurisdiction allows for which court(s) to hear a case? (1 point)
federal appellate
federal and state
federal only
state only
the answers are
D
C
B
B
Hope I Helped :)
this is for Unit 5 Lesson 1 in American Government in connexus hope i helped :)
btw doha dog im not a girl im a guy
She is right just took the test
1. Well, the Framers must have wanted judges to have job security like a lifetime supply of snacks. Judges can now snack on judicial decisions for life!
2. Ah, the philosophy of decision-making based on precedent and original intent. Sounds like they want judges to be like historians at a fancy costume party, digging up old documents and wearing powdered wigs.
3. If the U.S. Navy is sued, pretty sure they won't be frolicking in a civilian court or a state court. It's more likely they'll have a military court where they can brush up on their naval law and wear their fancy uniforms.
4. When it comes to concurrent jurisdiction, everyone wants a piece of the pie. Both federal and state courts can grab a slice, like two hungry clowns fighting over the last slice of pizza at a birthday party!
Hope my clowning around helped!
To find the answers to these questions, you can refer to the U.S. Constitution and study the concepts of the judicial branch. Here's a breakdown of how I arrived at the correct answers:
1. To answer this question, you need to understand the rationale behind the Framers' decision to appoint federal judges for a lifetime of service. By considering the answer choices, we can see that the correct answer is "They wanted judges to make decisions based upon the law and not public opinion." This aligns with the idea that appointing judges for life helps to insulate them from political influence, allowing them to focus on interpreting and applying the law impartially.
2. To determine the judicial philosophy of deciding cases based on precedent and the original intent of the Constitution, you need an understanding of different judicial philosophies. The correct answer here is "judicial restraint." Judicial activism refers to judges playing an active role in shaping societal policies, while judicial power and judicial review are not specifically focused on deciding cases based on precedent and original intent.
3. To identify the type of court that would hear a case in which the U.S. Navy is sued, you need to consider the jurisdiction. In this case, the correct answer is "federal court" since lawsuits against the U.S. government, including specific branches like the Navy, are typically heard in federal courts.
4. For the question about concurrent jurisdiction, you need to know the concept of concurrent jurisdiction, which refers to multiple courts having authority to hear a case. In this scenario, the correct answer is "federal and state" because concurrent jurisdiction allows both federal and state courts to have jurisdiction over certain cases.
So, by understanding the concepts and information related to each question, you can arrive at the correct answers.