1)why did the framers insist that federal judges be appointed for a lifetime of service?
a)they wanted as little change as possible in the judicial branch
b)they wanted to control the nominees of the president
c)they wanted to avoid a continual appointment process
d)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 ?
a)judicial activism
b)judicial power
c)judicial restraint
d)judicial review

3)which type of court would hear a case in which the u. s. navy was used?
a)civilian court
b)federal court
c)military court
d)state court

4)concurrent jurisdiction allows for which court(s) to hear a case?
a)federal appellate
b)federal and state
c)federal only
d)state only

The correct answer for 1 is
D)they wanted judges to make decisions based upon the law and not public opinion

If the judges were there until they retire then they could be more objective. That is because if they had to be reelected, they could just support what the people want so as to get reelected, which would mean that they are not objective and lawful judges.

The correct answer for 2 is
C)judicial restraint

This is done to prevent deciding on a case by case basis which might be highly controversial and often even oppressive towards people that are unwanted in the area of politics. This way criminals are treated according to older cases where older criminals were treated the same way.

The correct answer for 3 is
B)federal court

Federal courts are always the first step. Specific military courts with specific jurisdiction are used as appellate courts in this type of trials. If a person has problem with the Navy then it is solved by the federal courts that have jurisdiction over the case.

The correct answer for 4 is
B)federal and state

This is done to prevent court bias. Two or more courts can have jurisdiction over cases at the same time to prevent bias from sides towards one or another side or towards the state against the people involved. This was commonly used historically to protect people.

Everyone.. i would think?