Marbury v Madison
Background info:
Decision:
Why it matters:
Plz help :p

Answer and Explanation:

Background info: When John Adams was defeated by Thomas Jeffersoon in the presidential election, he appointed some allies to senior government posts, such as federal judges. He believed that this way it would be better to maintain some political control in the country. However, after his departure, a law was passed that would allow the number of judges to be reduced. In this scenario, Thomas Jefferson can name new judges and prevent the ones chosen by Adams from being kept. This sparked a discussion about the validity of the law, creating the Marbury v Madison case.

Decision: Foi decidido que os Juízes nomeados por Jefferson deveriam receber seus diplomas e continuar no cargo, sendo que qualquer lei que impedisse isso seria uma lei inconstitucional e portanto, nula.

Why it matters: This case is extremely important for the establishment of the policy we know today. This is because it was through him that the constitutional control exercised by the Judiciary Power was created.

as university of miami psychologists debra lieberman and adam smith pointed out in a recent article in the journal current directions in psychological science, humans have social and psychological mechanisms to deter incest. with very few exceptions, marriages between brothers and sisters and between parents and their children are verboten in every human culture. the primary psychological anti-incest mechanism is the yuck response. even the idea of sex with their mom or dad, bro or sis is upsetting to most people. the psychologist jonathan haidt has found that nearly everyone is repelled by the prospect of brother-sister sex, even in hypothetical situations in which there is no chance of pregnancy).

the biological cost of incest

this raises an interesting question: just what’s so bad about incest? sure, having sex with your dad or your sister seems gross — but why? some anthropologists have argued that incest taboos are learned social conventions. this explanation, however, doesn’t make sense to me as it does not explain the widespread existence of anti-incest mechanisms in creatures ranging from cockroaches to chimpanzees. second, the incest taboo is about as close to a universal law as human moral rules get.

why should mechanisms to avoid incest be so widespread both in nature and across human societies? the answer is simple. the problem with having sex close with relatives is that there is an astonishingly high chance that your offspring will be born with a serious birth defect.

the answer would be in this answer. someone already asked the question.