One interesting side issue in this case is the dual roles played by John Marshall as both the Secretary of State that failed to deliver Marbury’s commission and as the Chief Justice involved with deciding this case. Do you think it was appropriate for Marshall to hear and decide on this case considering his involvement in the circumstances of the case? Explain you reasoning.

Explain why the judicial branch is considered the weakest branch. explain what might happen if the judicial branch could not separate itself from the other two branches. explain how a strong judiciary branch would maintain limited government and individual rights. explain why a law that contradicts the constitution must be ruled invalid. explain why the legislature may not determine if its laws are unconstitutional. hamilton argues that the judicial branch is not above the legislative branch. explain his reasoning. how is the problem solved when two laws passed by the same legislature contradict each other? explain why hamilton believes it is pointless to argue the power of judicial review will enable judges to rule in ways that serve their own interests. explain how life tenure is necessary for the judicial branch to be able to protect individual rights against a majority. explain how everyone benefits when the rights of individuals or groups are protected. explain how limited terms of office might discourage the best-qualified people.

What is a country called that is technically independant but is controlled by another country

Using mr smith and his id, identify two potential internal validity threats that might affect the a—b design. tell me how that threat might impact conclusions in the a—b design. note #1: you cannot use maturation (since i already did that one for note #2: there are some mr smith id threats that won’t have much impact in a single case design.