# data[].attributes.body
- To protect basic human rights.
- The governemt allows people to peacefully assesmble, like in this peaceful black lives matter protest. The first amendment/ government allows you to peacefully protest and let your voice be heard as well as standing up for what you beleive is right. This photo represents the governent allowing peaceful protests because they are simply standing up for what they think is correct without insiting violence.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Clarksville Now

CLARKSVILLE, Tenn (CLARKSVILLENOW) - A group of peaceful demonstrators will conclude their activities on Wilma Rudolph Boulevard after 14 weeks.

The protests began in the wake of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor's deaths at the hands of law enforcement. Since May 30, the group has gathered every afternoon on Wilma Rudolph Boulevard in front of Governor's Square Mall to draw attention to important issues in the community and hopefully bring change.

Group organizer, Maurice Stegall, said they are holding a peaceful protest in an effort to spread love, happiness and joy. Stegall said a lot of people don't understand why we are standing out here.

"Our mission is to put unity back into the community and we're going to do it through peace, love and unity. I'm standing for equality and justice for all, fighting all of the good battles for what's right," said Stegall.

Since the protests began, public figures, including Mayor Joe Pitts and his wife Cynthia, councilwoman Valerie Guzman and state senate candidate Doug Englen, have visited the site to speak with with protesters.

According to a Facebook event page, the final day of protest will feature a DJ, food trucks and a host of speakers beginning at 5 p.m.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Wilma Rudolph Boulevard demonstration to conclude tonight after 14 weeks of peaceful protest | ClarksvilleNow.com

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
CLARKSVILLE, Tenn (CLARKSVILLENOW) - A group of peaceful demonstrators will conclude their activities on Wilma Rudolph Boulevard after 14 weeks. The protests began in the wake of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor's deaths at the hands of law enforcement.

# data[].attributes.body
- To represent the will of the majority to protect the rights of the minority
- The reason for this goal is to make laws to keep everything in order, while also protecting the minority rights. This photo represents this because it explains how the will of the majority protects they minority and is needed for that to happen.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The essence of democracy is majority rule, the making of binding decisions by a vote of more than one-half of all persons who participate in an election. However, constitutional democracy in our time requires majority rule with minority rights. Thomas Jefferson, third President of the United States, expressed this concept of democracy in 1801 in his First Inaugural Address. He said,

All . . . will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect and to violate would be oppression.

In every genuine democracy today, majority rule is both endorsed and limited by the supreme law of the constitution, which protects the rights of individuals. Tyranny by minority over the majority is barred, but so is tyranny of the majority against minorities.

This fundamental principle of constitutional democracy, majority rule coupled with the protection of minority rights, is embedded in the constitutions of all genuine democracies today. The 1992 constitution of the Czech Republic, for example, recognizes the concepts of majority rule and minority rights. Article VI says, "Political decisions shall stem from the will of the majority, expressed by means of a free vote. The majority's decisions must heed the protection of the minorities." The Czech constitution is filled with statements of guaranteed civil liberties, which the constitutional government must not violate and which it is empowered to protect.

Majority rule is limited in order to protect minority rights, because if it were unchecked it probably would be used to oppress persons holding unpopular views. Unlimited majority rule in a democracy is potentially just as despotic as the unchecked rule of an autocrat or an elitist minority political party.

In every constitutional democracy, there is ongoing tension between the contradictory factors of majority rule and minority rights. Therefore, public officials in the institutions of representative government must make authoritative decisions about two questions. When, and under what conditions, should the rule of the majority be curtailed in order to protect the rights of the minority? And, conversely, when, and under what conditions, must the rights of the minority be restrained in order to prevent the subversion of majority rule?

These questions are answered on a case-by-case basis in every constitutional democracy in such a way that neither majority rule nor minority rights suffer permanent or irreparable damage. Both majority rule and minority rights must be safeguarded to sustain justice in a constitutional democracy.

By John Patrick, Understanding Democracy, A Hip Pocket Guide (Oxford University Press)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Majority Rule and Minority Rights - Annenberg Classroom

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The essence of democracy is majority rule, the making of binding decisions by a vote of more than one-half of all persons who participate in an election. However, constitutional democracy in our time requires majority rule with minority rights.

# data[].attributes.body
-To promote fairness
- The government allows everyone a fair trial to prove their innocence by a defence team. Everyone deserves a chance to prove themselves innocent in a court of law. O.J simpson is a prime example. He was accused of murdering his then wife Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ron Goldman. There was a 252 day trial that ultimatly shocked the world with the non-guilty verdict. His defence team was able to prove that there was without a doubt that he was innocent. He had a jury trial.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
the o.j. simpson case in 90 seconds - cnn video

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The O.J. Simpson case in 90 seconds - CNN Video

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Follow the events surrounding O.J. Simpson's case - from Bronco chase to a shocking civil court decision - in less than 2 minutes.