Why does Hamilton think judges should be appointed

permanently rather than on a periodic basis?

me fatal

amilton,

t No. 78

O Permanent appointments allow for greater

regulation but less independence.

O Periodic appointments promote a fatal

independence.

O Periodic appointments are hard to regulate.

O Periodic appointments would destroy a judge's

independence.

O. Periodic appointments would destroy a judge's  independence.

Explanation:

Alexander Hamilton wrote in his "Federalist Papers No. 78" how the independence of judges is important for the security of everyone. Stating that "the general liberty of the people can never be endangered so long as the judiciary remains truly distinct from both the legislature and the Executive".  He further went to demand that "independence of the judges is equally requisite to guard the Constitution and the rights of individuals". He believes that independence of the judiciary from either the legislative or executive is a much needed act, for it will ensure the right and correct implementation of judgement. He proposed that "complete independence of the courts of justice is peculiarly essential in a limited Constitution".

Moreover, judges' permanent appointment will ensure the rightful passing of judgement which can be flawed if the judges are appointed periodically. For no two persons are the same, so this may lead to differences in opinions which will lead to the former judgement being recanted by the next person appointed. Thus, he opines that "periodical appointments, however regulated, or by whomsoever made, would, in some way or other, be fatal to their necessary independence".

Thus, the correct answer is the third option.

(202 bc - 220 ad) dynasty started by lui bang; a great and long-lasting rule, it discarded the harsh policies of the qin dynasty and adopted confucian principles; han rulers chose officials who passed the civil service exams rather than birth; it was a time of prosperity

can i know the options so i can answer the qu