What could an imbalance of political power be threaten?

A) the rights of individuals and the common good

B) the strength of the government

C) the weakness of the minority

Answer: Article VI, Paragraph 2 of the U.S. Constitution is commonly referred to as the Supremacy Clause. It establishes that the federal constitution, and federal law generally, take precedence over state laws, and even state constitutions.

Explanation:

The 10 law enforcement agencies or occupations that fall under the practice of criminology as stated in RA 11131 and a brief description of each:

The descriptions are as follows:

Philippine National Police (PNP) - the country's primary law enforcement agency that maintains peace and order and prevents and suppresses crime.

National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) - the country's premier investigative agency that conducts high-level and complex criminal investigations and provides intelligence support to law enforcement agencies.

Bureau of Jail Management and Penology (BJMP) - responsible for the safekeeping, reformation, and rehabilitation of persons deprived of liberty.

Bureau of Fire Protection (BFP) - responsible for preventing and suppressing fires and responding to other emergency situations.

Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA) - responsible for implementing the government's anti-drug campaign and enforcing drug laws.

Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) - responsible for ensuring the safety and security of the country's maritime jurisdiction and protecting its marine environment.

Bureau of Immigration (BI) - responsible for implementing the country's immigration laws and policies and managing the entry and exit of foreign nationals.

National Prosecution Service (NPS) - responsible for the prosecution of criminal cases and the protection of the rights of victims and witnesses.

Public Attorney's Office (PAO) - provides free legal assistance to indigent clients and serves as the legal defender of the poor.

Forensic Science Services - provide scientific and technical services to support the investigation of crimes and the administration of justice, including crime scene investigation, DNA analysis, and forensic pathology.

One would prefer to join any of these law enforcement agencies because one would love to make the world a better place as a law abiding citizen that one is.

learn more about law enforcement agencies: https://brainly.com/question/27722655

#SPJ1

Answer:

Here are the requirements.

Explanation:

- Be at least 18 years of age (some states/jurisdictions have a minimum age of 21)

- Possess a high school diploma or GED.

- Have no previous felony convictions.

- Be a United States citizen.

- Possess a valid driver's license.

Answer:

Individual Liberty

Explanation:

The quote by John Adams, "Liberty must at all hazards be supported. We have a right to it, derived from our Maker. But if we had not, our fathers have earned and bought it for us, at the expense of their ease, their estates, their pleasure, and their blood." this expresses the principle of Individual Liberty, which is the belief that individuals have certain rights and freedoms that are inherent to their existence and should be protected by the government. Adams argues that liberty is a natural right that individuals are entitled to and was earned through the sacrifice of previous generations. This principle is enshrined in the United States Constitution and is considered a fundamental value of American society.

The principle of government that is reflected in the quote by John Adams is Individual Liberty.

This principle is cantered around the idea that individuals have certain rights and freedoms that cannot be taken away by the government.

Adams is emphasizing the importance of protecting and preserving these rights, even if it comes at a great cost. He argues that these rights are inherent and come from a higher power, but also notes that previous generations have fought and sacrificed for these rights.

Therefore, it is crucial to continue to support and defend individual liberty at all costs.

For more similar questions on liberty

brainly.com/question/14822650

#SPJ11

To open a new account for a trust - the tax identification number of the trust must be obtained. Therefore the correct option is option A.

When opening a new account for a trust, it is necessary to obtain the tax identification number (TIN) of the trust.

This is because the trust is considered a separate legal entity and is therefore responsible for its own taxes. The TIN is used to identify the trust for tax purposes and is required for opening a new account.

The tax identification numbers of the trustee and the trust beneficiary are not required for opening a new account for a trust. Therefore, the correct answer is option- A) the tax identification number of the trust must be obtained.

For such more question on tax:

https://brainly.com/question/30655098

#SPJ11

Answer:

The Four Ways = Civil Litigation, Criminal Prosecution, Police Protection, and Injunctions

Explanation:

Criminal prosecution: The rule of law requires that those who commit criminal acts, such as damaging private property, be held accountable for their actions. Community members could report the damage to the authorities, who could then investigate the incident and pursue criminal charges against those responsible.

Civil litigation: The rule of law also provides for civil remedies, such as suing the individuals or groups responsible for the damage. Community members could file a lawsuit seeking compensation for the damage caused to their property.

Police protection: The rule of law requires that law enforcement agencies protect citizens and their property. Community members could request police protection to prevent further damage to their property during future protests.

Injunctions: The rule of law provides for injunctions to prevent individuals or groups from engaging in certain activities, such as damaging private property. Community members could seek an injunction to prevent future damage to their property during protests

The 10 law enforcement agencies under the practice of criminology as stated in RA 11131 are:

The descriptions are as follows:

Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) - responsible for ensuring the safety and security of the country's maritime jurisdiction and protecting its marine environment.

Bureau of Immigration (BI) - responsible for implementing the country's immigration laws and policies and managing the entry and exit of foreign nationals.

National Prosecution Service (NPS) - responsible for the prosecution of criminal cases and the protection of the rights of victims and witnesses.

Public Attorney's Office (PAO) - provides free legal assistance to indigent clients and serves as the legal defender of the poor.

Forensic Science Services - provide scientific and technical services to support the investigation of crimes and the administration of justice, including crime scene investigation, DNA analysis, and forensic pathology.

Philippine National Police (PNP) - the country's primary law enforcement agency that maintains peace and order and prevents and suppresses crime.

National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) - the country's premier investigative agency that conducts high-level and complex criminal investigations and provides intelligence support to law enforcement agencies.

Bureau of Jail Management and Penology (BJMP) - responsible for the safekeeping, reformation, and rehabilitation of persons deprived of liberty.

Bureau of Fire Protection (BFP) - responsible for preventing and suppressing fires and responding to other emergency situations.

Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA) - responsible for implementing the government's anti-drug campaign and enforcing drug laws.

I would be joining them because I would like to make the world a safe place to be as a law abiding citizen that I am.

learn more about law enforcement agencies: https://brainly.com/question/30329382

#SPJ1

Answer:

government spending and tax policies to influence economic conditions, especially macroeconomic conditions

The degree of causation of a tort great enough to be recognized by law is called Proximate Cause.

Proximate cause is a legal concept used to identify the scope of liability in tort law. It establishes the limit of responsibility by determining whether the injury was foreseeable and if the defendant was the direct cause of the injury or not.

Proximate cause focuses on the connection between the harm and the wrongful act, and it is an essential element of negligence liability.

In essence, proximate cause is when the law recognizes that the defendant’s actions, or inactions, resulted in a foreseeable harm to the plaintiff. It must be shown that the wrongful act was the direct cause of the injury, and it was foreseeable that harm could have resulted from the defendant’s act or omission.

Proximate cause also considers intervening forces, such as superseding causes, that break the chain of causation between the wrongful act and the resulting injury.

To know more about Proximate cause  click on below link:

https://brainly.com/question/12644777#

#SPJ11

Answer: Government/public sector

Explanation:

Government/public sector. Kyrin appreciates the opportunity to work with dedicated account executives who are experienced in assisting government/public sector accounts like the police department.

Thanks! :) #BO

She often buys from CDW, a technology-related firm, and appreciates the opportunity to work with dedicated account executives who are experienced in assisting government accounts like the police department.

Kyrin works for a government department and therefore she is bound to help government and as she is also the information technology director for the police department in Newburgh, Indiana. She is responsible for purchasing and maintaining all technology-related equipment and services for the department including computers, printers, body cameras, in-car video devices, servers, and networking equipment.

Know more about government  here:

https://brainly.com/question/16940043

#SPJ11

In HTML format, the z-scores can be written as subscripts, like this: z_1 = 2.17 and z_2 = -5.17.

To find the z-scores that correspond to the oldest and youngest senators of age 29 and 73 years, respectively, given that the average age of senators in the congress was 60 years and the standard deviation was 6 years, we can use the z-score formula:

z = (x - μ) / σ

where z is the z-score, x is the observed value, μ is the mean, and σ is the standard deviation.

For the oldest senator of age 73 years, we have:

z = (x - μ) / σ
z = (73 - 60) / 6
z = 2.17

For the youngest senator of age 29 years, we have:

z = (x - μ) / σ
z = (29 - 60) / 6
z = -5.17

Therefore, the z-scores that correspond to the oldest and youngest senators of age 73 and 29 years, respectively, are 2.17 and -5.17, rounded to two decimal places.

Note: In HTML format, the z-scores can be written as subscripts, like this: z_1 = 2.17 and z_2 = -5.17.

To know more about z-scores refer here:

https://brainly.com/question/15016913

#SPJ11

Answer:

Surveillance: With the rise of technology, there is an increasing concern about government surveillance and the potential violation of Fourth Amendment rights. This includes issues such as the use of facial recognition technology, warrantless searches of electronic devices, and the collection of data from social media platforms.

Border Searches: Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers have broad authority to conduct searches at the border, including searches of electronic devices without a warrant. This has raised concerns about the potential violation of Fourth Amendment rights, particularly for citizens and legal residents who are returning to the country.

No-Knock Warrants: No-knock warrants allow law enforcement officers to enter a person's home without first announcing their presence. This can lead to dangerous and violent encounters and has been the subject of controversy and legal challenges.

Qualified Immunity: Qualified immunity is a legal doctrine that protects government officials from being held personally liable for constitutional violations, including violations of the Fourth Amendment. Critics argue that this doctrine has led to a lack of accountability for law enforcement officers who engage in misconduct or violate citizens' rights.

Explanation:

Answer:

Section 15 of the Child Court Act, which provides that judges of the Child Court are to be appointed by the Minister for Justice, may be unconstitutional if it violates the separation of powers doctrine. The doctrine requires that the three branches of government, namely the executive, legislative, and judicial, be independent of each other.

In the case of Lobe & Anor v Speaker of the National Assembly and Anor (2016), the Constitutional Court of Zimbabwe held that the appointment of judges by the President, without the involvement of the Judicial Service Commission, was unconstitutional because it violated the separation of powers doctrine.

Similarly, in the case of Law Society of Zimbabwe v Minister of Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs (2015), the Constitutional Court of Zimbabwe held that the appointment of the Prosecutor-General by the President, without the involvement of the Judicial Service Commission, was unconstitutional because it violated the separation of powers doctrine.

Based on these cases, it can be argued that Section 15 of the Child Court Act, which provides for the appointment of judges of the Child Court by the Minister for Justice, violates the separation of powers doctrine and is therefore unconstitutional. Jane may challenge her conviction on this basis.

Explanation:

An advisory opinion is a device used to provide guidance on possible future legal actions or actions.The correct option is B.

The American legal system has three main parts: legislative, executive, and judicial. Courts are part of the judicial system, which deals with actual legal disputes and controversies that have already occurred.

They are responsible for interpreting the law, assessing the facts of the case, and rendering a decision that resolves the dispute between the parties involved.

Courts do not have the power to provide advisory opinions. Advisory opinions are usually issued by government agencies or high-ranking officials, who can provide legal guidance on how the law would apply in a hypothetical situation or how an action may impact legal rights and obligations.

Advisory opinions are generally not binding, which means that they do not have the force of law, but they can be influential in shaping legal arguments and decisions.

To know more about advisory opinion refer to-

brainly.com/question/3704871#
#SPJ11

The two categories of professional requirements used by US GAAS are identified as "unconditional" and "presumptively mandatory." Unconditional requirements are those that require compliance without departure, while presumptively mandatory requirements allow for some flexibility, as long as the auditor can justify any departure from the requirement. Option A.

It is important for auditors to understand and adhere to these professional requirements in order to conduct an audit that is in accordance with US GAAS. Unconditional requirements must be followed without exception, while presumptively mandatory requirements allow for some flexibility, as long as the auditor can justify any departure from the requirement.

By following these requirements, auditors can ensure that they are conducting an audit that is in accordance with US GAAS and providing an accurate and reliable assessment of the entity's financial statements.

To learn more about presumptively mandatory here:

https://brainly.com/question/30733630#

#SPJ11

Due to Luchiea Grissom's carelessness in using a dangerous chemical on Ebony Robinson's tresses, Ebony Robinson intends to sue her in civil court.Ebony should start her lawsuit by filing a complaint with the court. option A is correct.

A complaint is a legal document that sets out the facts of the case, the legal claims being made, and the relief being sought. In this case, the complaint would allege that Luchiea negligently applied a harmful chemical to Ebony's hair, causing it to fall out, and would ask the court for damages to compensate for the harm suffered. Filing a complaint is the first step in starting a civil lawsuit. It initiates the legal process and notifies the defendant (Luchiea) of the lawsuit and the legal claims being made against her. Once the complaint is filed, the defendant will have an opportunity to respond, and the case will proceed through the legal system.

For such more question on lawsuit

https://brainly.com/question/24910850

#SPJ4

Answer: This is a rare case.

Explanation:

In this case this most likely never happens but when it does you will still be investigated and you would still be a suspect until proven not guilty.

Answer: John Locke

Explanation: He uses a theory of natural rights to argue that governments have obligations to their citizens, have only limited powers over their citizens, and can ultimately be overthrown by citizens under certain circumstances.

Mary's neighbors should challenge her right to raise pigs in her suburban home due to the tort of nuisance.

Nuisance is a type of tort that protects a person from interferences with their use and enjoyment of their property. The significant amount of sold waste that Mary's pigs are producing are interfering with her neighbors' use and enjoyment of their property due to the bad smell, insects, and potential health hazards.

The bad smell, insects, and potential health hazards all count as interferences and the neighbors can seek legal action to stop Mary's activity.

To know more about Nuisance click on below link:

https://brainly.com/question/17751112#

#SPJ11

The given statement "In Chapter 1, Iris Marion Young is referenced as proposing that we understand differences of culture, social perspective, or particularistic commitment as resources to draw on for reaching understanding in democratic discussion rather than as divisions that must be overcome" is True because Iris Marion Young, a philosopher, feminist, and political theorist, believed that democratic dialogue is an essential aspect of a democratic society.

She also stated that differences of culture, social perspective, or particularistic commitment should be regarded as resources to draw on for reaching understanding in democratic discussion rather than as divisions that must be overcome.

The more diverse a society, the more crucial it is to develop democratic communication skills that allow for critical dialogue among individuals and groups with differing viewpoints. Differences should not be seen as obstacles to communication, but rather as a source of strength that contributes to the creation of innovative solutions to issues that are common to everyone.

To know more about Iris Marion Young, refer here:

https://brainly.com/question/17131445#

#SPJ11

Answer: A

Explanation:

A. No, because a plaintiff may not join federal and state law claims in the same action.

Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction, meaning they can only hear cases arising under federal law or cases where the parties are citizens of different states and the amount in controversy is greater than $75,000. As such, a court cannot adjudicate state law claims and federal law claims in the same action. The employee must file separate complaints for each claim.

Thanks! :) #BO

B. No, because a court must have subject-matter jurisdiction over all joined claims is the correct option.

In this case, the employee has filed a complaint in federal court alleging that the employer had breached the consulting contract, for which the employee sought $60,000 in damages, and that the employee had been the victim of gender discrimination during the course of her employment, in violation of federal law.

The employee's state law claims may be properly adjudicated by the court if the requirements for diversity jurisdiction are satisfied. Diversity jurisdiction requires that the parties be citizens of different states and that the amount in controversy exceed $75,000. In this case, the employee is seeking $60,000 in damages for the breach of contract claim and an unspecified amount for the gender discrimination claim.

If the total amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, the court may properly adjudicate the employee's state law claims. B. No, because a court must have subject-matter jurisdiction over all joined claims is the correct option.

For more about employment:

https://brainly.com/question/1361941

#SPJ11

Answer: Yes!

Explanation:

Yes, venue is proper in the federal district court for the state in which the musician resides. This is because the contract was negotiated and executed in that state, and the musician is seeking to enforce it in that court. The fact that the banjo was made in another state and the maker resides in a third state is irrelevant to the question of proper venue.

Thanks! :) #BO

No, venue is not proper in the federal district court for the state in which the musician resides. Venue is the legal term for the location where a case is heard. According to 28 U.S.C. § 1391, a civil action may be brought in:

1. A judicial district in which any defendant resides, if all defendants are residents of the State in which the district is located;
2. A judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of property that is the subject of the action is situated; or
3. If there is no district in which an action may otherwise be brought as provided in this section, any judicial district in which any defendant is subject to the court's personal jurisdiction with respect to such action.

In this case, the maker, who is the defendant, does not reside in the state in which the musician resides. Additionally, the events giving rise to the claim, namely the crafting of the banjo and the discovery of the defect, did not occur in the state in which the musician resides.

Therefore, venue is not proper in the federal district court for the state in which the musician resides. Instead, venue would be proper in the federal district court for the state in which the maker resides or the state in which the workshop is located.

Know more about federal district court here:

https://brainly.com/question/12129086

#SPJ11

Based on the direct reliance principle and the case of R v Clarke, it might be claimed that Carol and Jane created a legally enforceable contract. Carol's acceptance of Jane's offer resulted in the formation of a legally enforceable contract, and as a result, Carol is forced to sell the limited-edition bicycle to Jane for R150 000.

The main function of a contract is to establish the terms and conditions of an agreement between two or more parties. Contracts provide a framework for the parties to agree on their respective rights and obligations, as well as the consequences of any breach of those obligations. The contract also helps to establish a mutual understanding between the parties and helps to minimize the risk of misunderstandings or disputes. Contracts can cover a wide range of transactions and relationships, from simple sales agreements to complex business partnerships. Overall, the function of a contract is to provide clarity, certainty, and security for all parties involved.

To learn more about the agreement, click

https://brainly.com/question/24572146

#SPJ1

Answer:

please make me brainalist and keep smiling dude I hope you will be satisfied with my answer

Explanation:

Courts usually find probable cause when there is a reasonable basis for believing that a crime may have been committed (for an arrest) or when evidence of the crime is present in the place to be searched (for a search). Under exigent circumstances, probable cause can also justify a warrantless search or seizure.

Answer:

President

Explanation:

The President of the United States or the Prime Minister in some cases of different countries.

The rules of conduct for scientists who perform research are governed by research ethics. Respecting the dignity, rights, and wellbeing of study participants requires adherence to ethical norms.

Research ethics refers to the application of fundamental ethical principles to research activities, such as the design and conduct of research, respect for society and other people, the use of resources and research outputs, scientific misconduct, and the regulation of research.

Any dangers or undesirable outcomes should be outweighed by the research's value. While focusing on the research's potential advantages, researchers should aim to reduce any dangers to participants and themselves. To lessen any danger of harm, it is important to take strong safety precautions.

article.

Learn more about Research ethics: https://brainly.com/question/30409807

#SPJ9

The most accurate statement regarding an appeal by the corporate defendant is that the corporate defendant may file an interlocutory appeal of the certification of the class within 14 days of the order certifying the class.

An interlocutory appeal is an appeal of a ruling made by a trial court before the trial has concluded. In the case of a class-action lawsuit, the certification of the class is an important ruling that can significantly impact the outcome of the case. Therefore, the corporate defendant has the right to file an interlocutory appeal of the certification of the class within 14 days of the order certifying the class. This allows the corporate defendant to challenge the certification of the class before the case proceeds to trial. If the corporate defendant is successful in its appeal, the case may be dismissed or the class may be decertified, which could significantly impact the outcome of the case.

To learn more about Defendant :

https://brainly.com/question/14661448

#SPJ11

The court should treat the defendant's novation allegation as denied by the plaintiff.

This is because under Rule 7(a)(7) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a reply to the defendant's answer is made only when the plaintiff is ordered to do so by the court. If the court does not order the plaintiff to reply, then the plaintiff is deemed to deny any allegations in the defendant's answer, including any affirmative defenses. Therefore, the defendant's novation allegation is treated as denied by the plaintiff, even though the plaintiff did not actually reply to the allegation.

For more such questions on Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

https://brainly.com/question/28235406#

#SPJ11

Tristan hires Stefani to perform at Tristan's club, but she breaches the agreement to accept a higher-paying job at Rock Star Arena. Tristan files a suit against her. The court will most likely file a lawsuit against her.

A breach of contract happens when one party to a binding agreement fails to fulfill their obligation(s) as defined in the contract without a legally valid excuse or justification. The breach could be of various types, including the following:

A lawsuit is a process in which one or more parties seek to resolve a dispute through the court system. A lawsuit begins with the filing of a complaint, which is a legal document outlining the plaintiff's allegations against the defendant. The plaintiff is the party filing the lawsuit, while the defendant is the party being sued.

The judge in a case is responsible for deciding who wins or loses a lawsuit, and the jury determines the number of damages to be paid if the plaintiff is victorious. In the present case, it can be inferred that Stefani violated the agreement by accepting a better-paying job offer at the Rock Star Arena, which is a breach of contract.

As a result, Tristan has the right to sue Stefani in court for breach of contract. Therefore, the court is most likely to file a lawsuit against her.

To know more about breach of contract click here:

https://brainly.com/question/24259882

#SPJ11

Option (b), Verify Velma understands the document she is signing, and if she is unable to respond to the question on her own, you have the option of refusing to notarize it and ending the meeting.

An acknowledgment, which is used after the signer's identification has been verified, is a signer's declaration to a notary or other notarial official that they freely signed a document.

According to the Civil Code, a contract is deemed valid and legally binding if all of its constituent parts—namely, consent, object, and cause—are present. So, even if a contract is not notarized, it is still enforceable as long as these requirements are followed.

After being notarized, a private document becomes public and can be used as evidence in court without further attestation of its validity. A notarial document is legally required to be given full faith and credit when looked at from the front.

Learn more about notarial document: https://brainly.com/question/28204126

#SPJ9