The U.S. Supreme Court plunged into the politically messy issue of redrawing congressional and legislative districts Tuesday, in a case that could have profound implications for both major political parties for years to come. The high court heard oral arguments in a case brought by Democratic voters in Wisconsin. They argued that a Republican redistricting plan for the state assembly was so overtly partisan that it violated constitutional protections of freedom of speech and equal protection under the law for Wisconsin voters. A lower federal court sided with the challengers last year and against Republican state officials in Wisconsin. Officials argued Tuesday that they had not violated any constitutional rights when they drew up new boundaries for state assembly districts. "Our legislature followed traditional redistricting criteria, which is what they have been required to do and we think they followed that and that the justices will agree," Wisconsin Attorney General Brad Schimel told reporters in front of the court following the oral arguments. The process of state legislatures redrawing congressional and legislative district boundaries has been enmeshed in politics for two centuries. Early on, the process was referred to as "gerrymandering," where one party or the other tries to gain an electoral advantage by redrawing district boundaries to maximize their voting clout. Republicans have had success in several states in redrawing congressional and legislative voting districts and that has helped them maintain their majority in the House of Representatives. Democrats have come under fire as well for partisan maps in states where they control the legislature, like Maryland and Massachusetts. During Tuesday's oral arguments, the more liberal high court justices seemed open to the case brought by Democratic voters. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said a ruling in favor of the Republican districting plan in Wisconsin would encourage others to stack the deck against their political opponents. "What becomes of the... Question: How long did the supreme court consider the case? === The answer to the above question is
OPTIONS:
- six months
- one week
- not enough information
- two weeks
two weeks

Personally I enjoy doing things outside. You know, the good ol' nature. One time, me and my buddy Alex and some friends decided we were going to go camping. (I know, basic camping story. Well not exactly.) We planned on going for the weekend. Got to the spot and put up our tents like normal campers. But knowing myself and my friends we wanted to drink a couple beers and do some fishing. We did just that. Later that night we had started out camp fire and cooked up some links before bed time. My drunk self wanted to keep the fire going all night to prevent wild animals from coming t our sight. Well at least I thought that'd help. So I needed a bunch of wood to do so. Everyone was asleep by this point but me. So I took myself out into the woods a little deeper to grab a full broken down tree. I thought to myself, "Well if I want to utilize all of this wood I'm going to need to break it into smaller prices right?" Wrong. Well at least it was wrongful of how I planned on doing it. I attempted to break the tree in half by throwing it against another tree, as if I were as strong as the hulk or something. Once I chunked the tree at this tree I messed the entire vacation up. The tree came down on my knee and crushed it. I was in so much pain. I realized that I messed it up pretty bad so I laid there for a second trying to get back to my feet. The next day I couldn't apply any pressure and couldn't walk at all. I was dirty and smelly and needed some serious help on my leg but I was too far from any civilization. Worst nature experience ever! Question: How many beers did the narrator drink at the camping trip? === The answer to the above question is
OPTIONS:
- Nine.
- Seven.
- not enough information
- Five.

Answer: not enough information

Yes, after my mother died I found out from my supposed half-sister that my dad was not my birth father. She was 19 yrs older than me and had been living in Colorado since I was young. I was born and raised in N.J. I did not see her she did not come to see us. I was grown, married, had children and was living in FL. when she showed up at my door with her husband. I was shocked since we never heard from her and I did not know she even knew where I lived. She stayed all of about 20 minutes, just long enough to very unpleasantly state that "my father is NOT your father and I am NOT your sister!" I always wondered why my mom hated me SO much, I found out that both my mom and "dad" were having affairs while married and both had children by someone else. I have never met my birth father (to my knowledge) only know his name, but understand that he was the father of my supposed half-brother (which would make him my only whole sibling out of seven siblings.) Obviously my oldest "half-brother", who is 20 yrs older than me, is not actually related to me either. I don't have for sure "proof" about my other siblings, but they all have strong resemblances to my "dad" and each other. Growing up people would comment about how much I looked like my mom but I also was told a lot that you would never know me and my other sisters were sisters, we used to laugh about it as kids because my sisters (all light haired/light skinned) and I (dark haired/deeper skin toned) were very different in appearance but we "knew" we were sisters. I also found out that my apparently ONLY whole brother, approximately 9 yrs older than me, did not even know his real fathers name even though he knew our "dad" was not his birth father. Question: What did the author find out after her mother died? === The answer to the above question is
OPTIONS:
- That her birth father was not who she thought he was
- That her half-sister was was much older than she was
- Where her half-sister had been living
- not enough information
That her birth father was not who she thought he was