Write two paragraphs describing the different points of view in the following scenarios: In the first paragraph, you are a Republican senator who has just returned to Congress to find that O. M. Roberts, former president of the Texas Secession Convention is now a U. S. senator from that state. As a dedicated member of the United States Senate, explain why you believe it is wrong for Roberts to be there. In the second paragraph you will take the part of O. M. Roberts. Explain why you believe you should represent Texas in the Senate despite your leadership in the Texas Secession Convention.

Where do the majority of cases heard by the supreme court originate?

Whose political philosophy is mostly clearly reflected in the declaration of independence

Athief was passing by a house under construction when he noticed that the ladder being used by workers on the roof had copper braces supporting the rungs. after making sure that the workers on the roof could not see him, the thief used pliers that he had in his pocket to remove all of the copper braces that he could reach from the ground. a short time later, a worker climbed down the ladder and it collapsed. he fell to the ground and severely injured his back. the thief was apprehended a few hours later trying to sell the copper for scrap. a statute in the jurisdiction makes it a felony for "maliciously causing serious physical injury to another." the thief was charged with malicious injury under the statute and was also charged with larceny. after a jury trial in which the above facts were presented, he was convicted of both charges. if he appeals the conviction for the malicious injury charge on grounds of insufficient evidence, how should the court rule? a affirm the conviction, because the thief was engaged in criminal conduct at the time of the act that resulted in the injury. b affirm the conviction, because the jury could have found that the thief acted with malice. c reverse the conviction, because there was no evidence that the thief intended to injure anyone. d reverse the conviction, because there was no evidence that the thief bore any malice towards the workers on the roof.