How might the Supreme Court decisions in Korematsu v. United States (1944), i
involving the Japanese internment, and in Boumediene v. Bush (2008), involving the detention of citizens and foreign nationals who were declared to be "enemy combatants," be viewed in retrospect?
a. Both decisions might be viewed as upholding important constitutional principles.
b. The first might be viewed as a step toward protecting civil rights of citizens, and the second as a step backward in the struggle for civil rights protection.
c. Both decisions might be viewed as hindering the civil rights of citizens.
d. The first might be viewed as a missed opportunity for the Supreme Court to protect civil rights, and the second as a step toward protecting civil rights.
Answer: d
You might also like to view...
In this decision, the Supreme Court ruled that EPA rules must be observed without regard to their cost or technological feasibility.
A. Union Electric Co. v. Environmental Protection Agency B. Chevron v. National Resources Defense Council C. Whitman v. American Truck Association D. Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency E. Gibbons v. Ogden
Which of the following is NOT a reason that makes war acceptable, according to On the Law of War and Peace?
a. acquisition of land b. punishment c. reparations d. self-defense e. All of the above are acceptable reasons for conducting a war
When the National Assembly votes on a motion of no confidence or censure of the government, what happens?
a. The government must publicly apologize. b. The government must call new legislative elections. c. The government must introduce new legislation along the lines demanded by parliament. d. The government must resign. e. The Senate then begins impeachment proceedings.
The objectives of arms control treaties include all of the following except
a. provide arms to the other side. b. make war less likely. c. make war less destructive. d. decrease uncertainty about states' capabilities and intentions.