In holt vs hobbs what did the supreme court use as a basis for its decision?
a. holt was not a member of a recognized religion. b. the government was preventing holt from practicing his religion.
c. the prison had a compelling interest in facilitating prisoner identification and stopping the flow of contraband.
d. the prison had failed to show its policy was the least restrictive means of furthering its compelling interest.
i'm going to go with b. can someone check this answer? in advance! : )

The correct answer for: In holt vs hobbs what did the supreme court use as a basis for its decision? Is:

d. The prison had failed to show its policy was the least restrictive means of furthering its compelling interest.

Explanation:

Hi, this is a very tricky question but if we check out the situation we will understand everything. First of all Holt v. Hobbs was a case in which the arguments made by the prison were very weak. Because they only recalled that it could be used as a place to hide something dangerous, or for contraband. But they didn't show proof of it. Therefore, the supreme court made consideration in religious and beliefs matters. According to that the prohibition of short beards in a Muslim prisoner violated the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act. Thus, d) is the best option because is the objective answer.

wetland functions are defined as a process or series of processes that take place within a wetland. these include the storage of water, transformation of nutrients, growth of living matter, and diversity of wetland plants, and they have value for the wetland itself, for surrounding ecosystems, and for people.

explanation:

hope that you to understand!