which phrase in the u.s. constitution addresses the power to seize property? group of answer choices eminent domain bills of attainder writ of habeas corpus reserved powers

Answer:

The 5th amendment

Explanation:

The fifth amendment of the U.S. constitution states that citizens are entitled to due process

Answer:

5th Amendment!

Answer:

Yes

Explanation:

Ubuntu is the long tradition of african cultures where criminals or people that have done something wrong have to do right by the people they injured or hurt, and they have to help them healing the social tissue and restoring relationships in order to be able to go back into society.

It's a very close matter to rehabilitative justice, in the sense of wanting to restore the social tissue and helping the person get back to society as a good, productive and healthy member of the society, Ubuntu has proven to be a good method and state of mind when dealing with hurt societies by the narcotrafic and organized crime.

THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT forbids a registered accounting firm from providing specific non-audit services to an audit client.

A federal law from the United States enacted in 2002 called the Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires firms to follow specific procedures for maintaining financial records and reporting. The rule was implemented in response to many significant business and accounting scandals, notably Enron and WorldCom. The bill's provisions address the duties of the board of directors of public corporations, impose criminal penalties for specific types of wrongdoing, and call on the Securities and Exchange Commission to establish regulations outlining public businesses' legal obligations. The Act's provisions, such as the wilful destruction of evidence to obstruct a government investigation, also apply to privately held businesses.

To know more about the SARBANES-OXLEY ACT visit:- https://brainly.com/question/27915345

#SPJ4

Answer:

Discuss the differences between legislation and case law and further explain the relationship between the two sources of law. Discuss the differences between legislation and case law and further explain the relationship between the two sources of law.

Explanation:

Answer:

the federalist papers I believe

Explanation:

Answer:

External stresses stemming from the criminal justice system and the society at large. Internal stresses confronting individual officers.46  Police stress arises from several features of police work. Alterations in body rhythms from monthly shift rotation, for example, reduce productivity.

Answer:

Get out of the vehicle. Go in the direction of the ongoing train. Not on the track. Off to the side of the track. This is so that when the train hits the vehicle you will be behind the path of the vehicle when it becomes a flying billiard ball.

Explanation:

Gilligan would expect Lamar to use justice-based morality.

Gilligan's theory of moral development distinguishes between justice-based morality and care-based morality. Justice-based morality emphasizes principles of fairness, rights, and impartiality. Care-based morality, on the other hand, focuses on empathy, relationships, and consideration of others' needs

In this scenario, as Lamar is confident in his ability to make sound moral judgments, Gilligan would expect him to utilize justice-based morality. This perspective prioritizes the application of objective rules and principles in decision-making, considering what is fair and just for all parties involved.

Lamar's confidence suggests that he is likely to approach moral judgments from a justice-based perspective, basing his assessments on rationality, equality, and adherence to established moral frameworks rather than emphasizing care or personal relationships.

LEARN MORE ABOUT morality here: brainly.com/question/32472150

#SPJ11

The phrase "I've decided not to tell you about the alleged shipwreck" implies that Nixon's denial of the Watergate break-in is hard to believe, and Attorney General Mitchell would support Nixon.

The Watergate scandal was a political scandal that occurred in the United States during the 1970s. The scandal arose after a break-in at the Democratic National Committee (DNC) headquarters in the Watergate office complex in Washington, D.C. on June 17, 1972.The events that followed the break-in resulted in President Richard Nixon's resignation from office in August 1974.

Nixon was accused of trying to cover up his involvement in the break-in and other illegal activities. The phrase "I've decided not to tell you about the alleged shipwreck" implies that Nixon's denial of the Watergate break-in is hard to believe, and Attorney General Mitchell would support Nixon. This statement is related to the Watergate scandal and suggests that Nixon was involved in a cover-up.

To know more about Nixon's  visit:-

https://brainly.com/question/1131063

#SPJ11

The answer is true.

and yeah lol.

Answer:

attempt to get them elected and thereby implement their agenda.

Explanation:

The given examples can be labelled as direct or representative government as given below-

Direct democracy:

A state constitution is amended following a referendum.

California's citizens vote to recall their Governor.

Representative democracy:

Congress votes to impeach an unpopular candidate.

A major bill that many legislators campaigned on passes Congress.

A major bill supported by the majority of citizens passes a state legislature.

Democracy is a form of government where the authority lies on some people but the important and unique part of it is that the government is established "of the people, for the people, and by the people."

A democracy is a government where power rests on the public instead of a single ruler. There are different types of democracies, but all revolve around the general importance of the public.  

Learn more about direct and representative democracy here:

brainly.com/question/14649838

Judicial restraint is the refusal to exercise judicial review in deference to the process of ordinary politics.

Here are some Supreme Court justices who practiced it:

The Rules Committee decides whether the debate can go a place, hence the correct response is C.

Each state is guaranteed at least one representative in the House of Representatives, which is a part of the legislative branch of the federal government and shares equal legislative authority with the U.S. Senate (the other part of the legislative branch).

The complete question is :

In the House of Representatives, what is the next step in the legislative process immediately after a debate is scheduled?

A. All present members of the House vote on the proposed bill.

B. The Speaker of the House allows members to speak about the proposed bill.

C. The Rules Committee decides whether the debate can take place.

D. The Committee of the Whole debates and revises the proposed bill.

When a bill is introduced in the House (a bill can only be introduced by a member of the House known as a sponsor), it is referred to a committee. If the committee votes in favor of scheduling the measure, the Rules Committee will carefully review the bill and offer a recommendation.

Thus, option C is the correct answer.

Learn more about the House of representatives:

https://brainly.com/question/747415

#SPJ1

The legal concepts and laws that are triggered by this scenario are the Breach of Contract and Contractual Remedies. Valerie has a case in this scenario.

What can be done to solve the problem in this scenario is that a demand letter can be sent to Major Tom’s Ground Control company. This letter should indicate that they breached the contract by failing to clean the property after completing the work and that she will not be paying the balance of $5000.00. In addition, Valerie should include that she is willing to pay a fair amount to have another company come in and clean up the property. Finally, she could inform Major Tom’s Ground Control that if they fail to comply with her demands, she will take legal action against them.

It is necessary to note that a demand letter should be sent with registered mail. This ensures that the letter is received by the intended recipient. If the letter is ignored, Valerie may need to file a claim in Small Claims Court. The evidence to support her claim includes the contract, deposit, pictures of the property, the demand letter, and any other correspondence between her and Major Tom's Ground Control.

Learn more about Small Claims Court: https://brainly.com/question/16507110

#SPJ11

Answer:

12 months

Explanation:

I think

Answer:

five years

Explanation:

your welcome

Extractive institutions like coal, timber, etc.—that are often economically dominant in rural settings—tend to concentrate power in urban communities.

This is a term that is used to refer to institutions that extract wealth and natural resources from other areas.

The resources are often gotten from the rural areas and they are used in companies that are in the urban centers.

Read more on extractive institutions here:

https://brainly.com/question/10698634

#SPJ1

Answer: ok he did it

Explanation:The reason is because 1+1 is 2 - 1 thats 3 quick maths.

The  Mentally Ill Offender Treatment and Crime Reduction Act of 200 general provides grants to eligible state and local governments.

        Indian tribes and organizations design and implement programs that promote public safety by ensuring that adults or youth with mental health conditions have access to mental health care. Supervised jointly by the Criminal Justice Department, the Juvenile Justice Department or the Mental Health Court, and the Mental Health Agency collaborative programs.

          The Indian Penal Code exempts persons with mental health problems who are not aware of their affairs under the Act. During the crime, provided that they do not understand the nature of the crime committed, this clause does not consider criminal justice and the legal system.

To know more about  Mentally Ill Offender Treatment:

https://brainly.com/question/28485784

#SPJ4

During the financial crisis in 2008, when Bear Stearns faced significant financial trouble, the Federal Reserve played a pivotal role in facilitating its acquisition by JPMorgan Chase.

The Federal Reserve, particularly the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, intervened to prevent the potential collapse of Bear Stearns and the potential broader impact on the financial system.

The Federal Reserve, in collaboration with JPMorgan Chase, provided financial support and guarantees to facilitate the acquisition and stabilize Bear Stearns. The Federal Reserve offered a loan facility to JPMorgan Chase, backed by Bear Stearns' assets, to mitigate the risks associated with acquiring a troubled institution. Additionally, the Federal Reserve provided liquidity and emergency funding to stabilize the financial system during this period of turmoil.

The actions taken by the Federal Reserve regarding Bear Stearns were aimed at preventing a systemic crisis and maintaining stability in the financial markets. The intervention reflected the Federal Reserve's role as the central bank of the United States, responsible for overseeing and managing monetary policy and safeguarding the overall health and stability of the financial system.

To know more about  financial system., click here:

https://brainly.com/question/19560280

#SPJ11

Answer:

amendment

Explanation:

Answer:

Amendment

Explanation:

According to the law of simplicity (also known as the law of prägnanz), people will perceive a complex series of shapes in a way that is simplest for them to understand.

Hence the correct answer is Law of Simplicity.

The law of simplicity is based on the idea that the brain naturally seeks to create order out of chaos. When presented with a complex visual scene, the brain will attempt to organize the elements into coherent shapes and patterns to make sense of the information. This process is often automatic and unconscious and can occur very quickly.

For example, when looking at a group of objects, the brain will try to group them based on their size, shape, colour, or texture similarity. This helps to create a sense of order and structure in the visual scene.

To know more about law of prägnanz, visit:

https://brainly.com/question/30630387

#SPJ4

Answer:

Title: The Legality of Using Deadly Force in Self-Defense: A Case Study

In the scenario presented, a man and his wife were confronted by a robber wielding a knife as they reached their car. The robber threatened to kill them if they did not hand over all their money and jewelry. The husband then retrieved a loaded pistol, turned and fired the weapon, killing the suspect. The question now is what charges will be filed against the man, if any, and whether the husband relied on lawful use of force.

In most jurisdictions, the use of deadly force is justified only when it is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to oneself or another person. In this case, the husband could argue that he used deadly force to protect himself and his wife from the robber who was armed with a knife and had threatened to kill them. However, the use of deadly force is not justified if the attacker no longer poses an imminent threat, and the use of non-lethal force or retreat would be a reasonable option.

Moreover, the husband's use of deadly force may also be justified under the "castle doctrine," which allows individuals to use deadly force to protect themselves and their property against intruders in their own homes. However, in this case, the incident occurred outside of the couple's car, which is not considered their home, and the use of deadly force may not be justified under this doctrine.

Depending on the state, the husband may be required to retreat or use non-lethal force if he can do so safely, instead of using deadly force. However, in some states, such as the "stand your ground" states, individuals have no duty to retreat and may use deadly force if they reasonably believe it is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm.

Therefore, the legality of the husband's use of deadly force in this case depends on the specific laws and circumstances of the jurisdiction where the incident occurred. If the use of deadly force is deemed lawful, then no charges will be filed against the husband. However, if the use of deadly force is not justified under the law, then the husband may be charged with various criminal offenses, such as manslaughter or murder.

In conclusion, the legality of using deadly force in self-defense is a complex issue that depends on the specific laws and circumstances of the jurisdiction where the incident occurred. In this case, the husband could argue that he used deadly force to protect himself and his wife from the robber who was armed with a knife and had threatened to kill them. However, whether the husband relied on lawful use of force depends on the specific laws and circumstances of the jurisdiction where the incident occurred.

Answer:

On June 12, 1994, Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman, were found dead at Brown's home. Prosecutors argued that Simpson killed his ex-wife and her lover out of jealousy. Prosecutors began by reporting Nicole Brown Simpson's call to the emergency center from 1989. In it, Nicole Brown said she was afraid Simpson would harm her. Prosecutors also came up with Simpson's DNA material and shoe prints from him, found at the scene of the crime. Dozens of experts stated that Simpson must have been at the scene of the crime. There was a lot of circumstantial scientific evidence.

Simpson hired a team of expensive attorneys led by Robert Shapiro and later Johnnie Cochran. Cochran was nationally known as a lawyer for (mainly black) celebrities and specialized in cases involving discrimination or police brutality. From the outset, the defense was based on the charge of racism. The lawyers claimed that Simpson had been a victim of police fraud by depositing evidence against Simpson at the crime scene. The leader of the investigation into the double murder (Mark Fuhrman) was called a racist by the defense, and the lawyers found footage in which Fuhrman had used the N word.

While prosecutors believed they had a solid case and expected a conviction, polls showed that a majority of black residents of the United States believed that Simpson had been a victim of police fraud. Most white residents of the United States were convinced of Simpson's guilt. As the jury's verdict drew closer, racial tension rose, and some politicians feared a repeat of the Los Angeles race riots a few years earlier. On October 3, 1995 Simpson was acquitted of murder by the jury.

State sovereignty is both essential to the functioning of the United Nations and a significant hinderance for its potential efficacy.

It acts as the foundation for UN values and principles, as it affords members the right to self-determination, independence, freedom, and the right to promote their own interests. However, the very notion of state sovereignty restricts the UN from acting and responding to global challenges in a unified and decisive manner.

As sovereignty is limited only to the state, it makes it difficult for the UN to exercise collective will, as members may not be willing to make collective decisions in the face of intervention and sovereignty infringements. This lack of cohesion creates a paradox between the nations and the UN, as state sovereignty is the prerequisite for the UN to exist, yet serves as a major barrier to its effectiveness.

To know more about State sovereignty , click here:

https://brainly.com/question/28386639

#SPJ4

Answer:

Idrk depends

Explanation:

Is there an answer you need help on?

Answer:

i am brainless.

Thx for the free pts, have a wonderful day/night, stay safe, happy holidays, and merry christmas!

Answer: violent, territorial, and predatory

Explanation: Black gangs have significantly evolved over the last 40 years, and trend analysis indicates that these gangs will continue to grow in both rural and urban areas. As gangs and gang membership increase, gangs will become more violent, territorial, and predatory in response to competition and rivalry.

I'm a little bit confused between a and b..

but I found this maybe it will help u..

Explanation:

The Court held that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that firearm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self- defense within the home.

Answer:

"Option a" seems to be the correct solution.

Explanation:

Other alternatives weren’t linked to the sort of situation in question. So "Option a" is the right experience.