Define the following terms: 1) Worldview 2) Imago Dei 3) Immanent Frame 4) Meta-Ethics 5) Utilitarianism 6) Retributive Justice (or Lex Talionis) 7) Eternal Law (as taught by Thomas Aquinas 8) Theocracy 9) Trial by Ordeal 10) Objective Morality.

H and W married in 2010 and live in California. Prior to the marriage, W was a successful entrepreneur with own skincare company, “GlowUp, Inc”, and had accumulated substantial wealth. After marriage, W continued to run GlowUp, Inc, and made substantial profits, which she deposited into an investment account titled solely in her business name. She did not discuss this with H. H, a screenwriter, experienced several years of sporadic employment. Without informing W, he borrowed $50,000 using a joint credit card to finance the production of his short film, which he posted on YouTube.  The film was a failure.  When the card statements arrived, W was furious and paid it off using funds from her GlowUp investment account. Around the same time, W secretly transferred $200,000 from her secret investment account to her sister, calling it a “business loan” but never demanding repayment. She did not tell H about the transfer. In 2023, W purchased a Tesla for herself, paying $80,000 from the GlowUp account. She took title in her name only and told H, “This is mine. You never paid for any of this.” In 2024, GlowUp was sued for product liability. W’s separate bank account was levied to satisfy a $250,000 judgment. H immediately filed for divorce. Analyze the rights and obligations of H, W, and creditors under California community property law with respect to the following: The GlowUp investment account and related transactions. The credit card debt incurred by H. The Tesla purchase. The product liability judgment and creditors’ rights. Any potential fiduciary duties and breaches.

The Framers intended – and did in fact – create a Christian nation.

Henry and Whitney married in 2021 in California. Five days before their wedding, Henry gave Whitney an agreement that stated “any income earned by either spouse during marriage would remain their separate property,” the agreement further included that each party waive any rights  to spousal support in the event of divorce. Henry told her that if she didn’t sign it the wedding was “off.” Whitney didn’t want to sign the agreement but was worried about the embarrassment of telling her friends and family that they weren’t getting married. Whitney signed the agreement that day. Henry wrote the agreement himself, neither party had representation. In 2022, Henry won $1.2 million in the state lottery using a ticket he bought with his “personal allowance” money, which came from his earnings.  He opened a new savings account solely in his name and deposited the lottery winnings. Using a portion of these funds, he bought a house in Washington, taking the title solely in his name. Later in 2022, Henry purchased a rare vintage diamond necklace for $40,000 using funds from the savings account. He gave it to Whitney on their anniversary, saying, “This is for you—something special to wear.” Whitney thanked him and wore the necklace regularly. In 2023, Henry gave Whitney a will he had prepared. Included in the will was a statement that the vintage diamond necklace was Henry’s separate property and no longer community property. Wendy signed the will without reading it. In December 2024, Henry sold the Washington house to his brother James without Whitney’s knowledge. In February 2025, Whitney found out about the sale of the house. She immediately filed for divorce. At the time of the divorce, Henry’s savings account, which contained only his lottery winnings, had a remaining balance of $500,000. No other funds had been deposited into the account. What are Henry and Whitney’s respective rights and liabilities regarding: Henry’s savings account? Washington house? The Vintage Diamond? Answer according to California law.

The deficiencies of the Articles of Confederation include all the following except: 

The Constitution’s primary means for achieving its goal of controlling and distributing power centered on structural considerations.

According to the Federalists, the proposed constitution erects:

Originalism, as an interpretive methodology, utilizes canons of construction outside the operative legal text in addition to the operative legal text itself.

The Constitutional Convention failed to achieve the purpose for which it was convened.

Originalism, as an interpretive methodology, presupposes legal outcomes.