Write a paper of 3-5 pages (not including title and references) in which you trace the preoccupations of eugenicists throughout the world to the themes we have been discussing in American eugenics and address the international laws passed to uphold these principles.Then make an argument about the tightening noose created by eugenics principles governing immigration law, sterilization, and anti-Semitism in Europe in 1935.Note how close we now draw to the rise of Hitler and his campaign to eliminate all non-Aryans, especially Jews and Gypsies, as well as those deemed genetically defective because of congenital health problems such as epilepsy, insanity, multiple sclerosis, cerebral palsy, and other common diseases. Demonstrate how the themes in American eugenics (classism, racism,religious bias, nativism, and misogyny) we have been discussing for weeks are reiterated in international eugenics laws you read this week.You can use the link below and attached documents for supporting detailshttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/issues/191721/

Professional Experience TwoDue at the end of week 3 (not eligible for late policy unless an approved, documented exception is provided)*In the workplace, incomplete work is not accepted. The professional experience assignments are designed to help prepare you for that environment. To earn credit, make sure you complete all elements and follow the directions exactly as written. This is a pass/fail assignment, so no partial credit is possible. Assignments that follow directions as written will be scored at a 22. Assignments that are incomplete or do not follow directions will be scored at a zeroSteps to Complete Professional Experience #2Step one: On the top of the page, there is a Link to One Drive – that link will take you to a PowerPoint presentation template entitled "WK3_FAQ." Click on the link and review the document.Step two: Choose an unanswered frequently asked question from the “Wk3_FAQ” document.Step three: Write the best answer possible to the question. Make sure your answer is no less than 20 words and no more than 50 words or else your submission will not be eligible for credit.If you use an outside source to complete your response, provide an APA-style in-text citation and a reference.If you use the textbook to complete your response, include an APA in-text citation (no reference is needed). Include the page number in the citation. Step four: Put your first and last name in the "Employee" section. Step five: Submit the answer to your chosen question to Blackboard using the Professional Experience #2 link in the Week 3 tab in Blackboard.In order to receive your points for this assignment, you must do the following:Choose an unanswered questionMake sure your answer to the question is no less than 20 words and no more than 50 words exactly – use the Word Count tool in Microsoft Word to checkRemember, citations and references do not count towards the word countProvide a viable, complete answer (you must provide a hyperlink to the resource if applicable and clearly give credit in another way – e.g., provide an in-text citation for the textbook (no reference needed) and an in-text citation and a reference for an outside source used)Fill in the "Employee" section with your nameSubmit your FAQ answer to the Week 3 Professional Experience #2 link in BlackboardThis is a pass/fail assignment. All elements must be completed (simulating the workplace where incomplete work is unacceptable) for credit. You cannot receive partial credit.

1:In Federalist No. 78, Alexander Hamilton argued that the judiciary was the least dangerous branch of government. Many people would argue that Hamilton was incorrect and that today's courts wield an enormous amount of power. However, Hamilton believed the courts were the least dangerous branch because they had the power of neither the purse nor the sword. The courts' power increased with John Marshall's establishment of judicial review.All presidents are concerned with the legacy they leave once out of office and major influence on this legacy is the Supreme Court justices they appoint. For this reason, politics plays an immense role the nomination process. Consider the nomination of Merrick Garland by Barack Obama in 2016 to fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court created by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia (an icon of conservative ideology). However, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell declared any appointment by the sitting president to be null and void. He said the next Supreme Court justice should be chosen by the next president — to be elected later that year. According to McConnell, "the American people should have a say in the court's direction. It is a president's constitutional right to nominate a Supreme Court justice, and it is the Senate's constitutional right to act as a check on the president and withhold its consent." Supreme Court picks have often been controversial but there was no precedence to ignore the nominee entirely. Scalia’s seat would later be filled by Neil Gorsuch (nominated by President Donald Trump).Based on this information (and your own outside research), analyze the process by which U.S. judges are nominated and confirmed. Does this seem like a fair process? What extent does it have on the political lean of the Court, and therefore, on United States law (specifically civil rights and civil liberties)? Cite specific examples. Consider the concepts of judicial activism and judicial restraint in your response.Your initial discussion postings (250-300 words) should demonstrate an understanding and analysis of the assigned readings and video. It may be helpful to reference the assigned material in your response demonstrating connections between your thoughts and the course resources. In addition, you will also need to post two substantial responses (about 150-200words) to at least two of your classmates' posts.2:One of the most divisive and economically pressing questions in U.S. domestic policy over the last several decades has been healthcare. The United States spends twice as much in terms of Gross Domestic Product on healthcare as the next biggest spender in the advanced world, and yet our average lifespan is less than most of the countries on the list. The debate in the U.S. is over whether or not healthcare should be a part our larger commercial system, and hence accessed through private insurers giving the consumer more "choice," or whether healthcare access should be guaranteed to all through either a hybrid public/private system (like Obamacare) or a more robust public system in which healthcare is guaranteed to all residents through a government-run healthcare program, with a potential downside of having less "choice" in such a system. Public polling suggests that there is no bigger public policy issue that Americans care about as much as healthcare at this point in our nation's history. For the discussion, which of the various options listed above (or options that you have researched on your own) do you support as the way forward for the American healthcare system? Explain your answer, arguing for its superiority over the other options.Your initial discussion postings (250-300 words)