steven recently purchased a meat-packing plant in which the employees are unionized. steven confesses that he knows almost nothing about labor law. in advising him about the national labor relations act, you should tell him that he is prohibited from engaging in all of the following except:

Answer:

Where's the question?........

Answer:

Avoid a semicolon when a dependent clause comes before an independent clause. Incorrect: Although they tried; they failed. Correct: Although they tried, they failed.

Explanation:

an example if it helps

Answer:

No, I don't perceive Mr. S to be a reliable source. It is because the way he describes that how he discovered the Hae's body is enough to raise thr brows of viewers and listeners.

Explanation:

In Episode 3 of Serial, Mr. S is called by detectives to investigate his side of the story and how he came to find Hae's body which was found completely camouflaged in the dirt.

Mr. S can not be considered a reliabel source by the way he describes the event of his founding Hae's body in the forest, 127 miles away from the main road. Mr. S gives description to the detectives that he got off his car to pee and had a bottle of beer in his hand. It is interesting to note and enough to raise brows of listeners and viewers of the episode that how was he able to see Hae's body which was covered with dirt and was behind a heavy fallen log, which made impossible for someone to see the body easily (especially if someone is drunk).

So, because of this reasoning, one can not considered Mr. S to be a reliabel source.

Answer:

The American Bill of Rights, inspired by Jefferson and drafted by James Madison, was adopted, and in 1791 the Constitution's first ten amendments became the law of the land.

Hope this helps :) <3

Answer:james madison

Explanation:The American Bill of Rights, inspired by Jefferson and drafted by James Madison, was adopted, and in 1791 the Constitution's first ten amendments became the law of the land.

Explanation:

These cases are related to the criminal justice system of United States. The founding's of the supreme court in the form of constitutional arguments is highlighted.

Furman v. Georgia 1972 - The main constitutional question in this case was whether the death penalty was being applied in a way that violated the eighth Amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishment by being applied in a discriminatory manner. The Supreme Court ruled that all current death penalty laws are unconstitutional after concluding that the death penalty is being used arbitrarily and capriciously.

Gregg v. Georgia 1976 - Whether the death penalty, as modified by the state of Georgia was constitutional was at issue in this case. The Supreme Court ruled that the revised death penalty statute was constitutional and did not contravene the Eighth or Fourteenth Amendment because it provided for a segmented trial process with specific aggravating and mitigating factors.

The constitutional question in Coker v. Georgia (1977) was whether the death penalty was an appropriate sentence. The death penalty was deemed to be an excessive punishment for serious crimes by the Supreme Court, and it also violated the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishment.

The main constitutional question in McCleskey v. Kemp (1987) was whether statistical proof of racial bias in the execution of death sentences was sufficient to establish an Eighth Amendment violation. The Supreme Court ruled that there was insufficient evidence to prove a constitutional violation.

Arizona v. Ring (2002) - In this case, the legal issue was whether the fact based determinations required to impose the death penalty must be made by a jury rather than a judge. The Supreme Court ruled that in order to impose the death penalty, factual findings must be made by a jury, not a judge, in accordance with the Sixth Amendment's guarantee of a jury trial.

In 2002 Atkins v. Virginia The Eighth Amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishment was at issue in this case's constitutionality which involved the execution of defendants who had intellectual disabilities. Such executions, according to the Supreme Court, violated the Eighth Amendment and were therefore unconstitutional.

The main constitutional query raised in Roper v. Simmons 2005 was whether the Eighth Amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishment applied to defendants who were under the age of 18 when they committed the crimes. According to the Supreme Court it is unconstitutional to execute defendants who were under the age of 18 when they committed the crimes.

The legal question in Witherspoon v. Illinois 1968 was whether potential jurors who expressed opposition to the death penalty could be barred from a capital trial. According to the Supreme Court, such jurors cannot be automatically disqualified rather, they can only be disqualified if their stance on the death penalty would prevent them from upholding the law and applying the death penalty when necessary.

Florida v. Hurst (2016) - The Sixth Amendment guarantee of a jury trial was at stake in this case and it was unclear whether Florida's death penalty sentencing policy was constitutional. The Supreme Court ruled that the plan was unconstitutional because it gave a judge the authority to determine the facts necessary to impose the death penalty rather than a jury.

Learn more about supreme court at:

brainly.com/question/1755400

#SPJ1

Answer:

Si tuviese la oportunidad de crear una ley en contra del Racismo, propondría crear una normativa que sancione con penas graduales a quienes incurran en conductas discriminatorias. Así, crearía un registro público de delitos racistas, donde se registrarían los delitos cometidos por cada persona, la cual tendría cada vez mayores penas según vaya reincidiendo en sus conductas: pasando desde los trabajos comunitarios hasta las multas, las inhabilitaciones para determinadas actividades o incluso la prisión en ciertos casos de gravedad.

Answer:

a

Explanation:

Answer:

A. Fifth Amendment and was addressed by Miranda v. Arizona

Explanation:

Answer: C. A higher exchange rate for the country's currency can lead to more  favorable terms of trade.

Explanation:

Just got it right!

In Federalist 39, Alexander Hamilton argues that the proposed Constitution is a republican form of government.

Hamilton acknowledges that the Constitution does not create a pure democracy, in which all laws are made directly by the people. However, he argues that this is not necessary for a government to be considered a republic. He points out that even in a pure democracy, the people must delegate some of their power to representatives.

Hamilton concludes that the proposed Constitution is a republican form of government and that its advocates should not abandon it simply because it is not a pure democracy. He defines a republic as "a government in which the scheme of representation takes place."

Find out more on the Federalist papers at https://brainly.com/question/233891

#SPJ4

Answer: 848,022,109

hope this helps

plz mark brainlesit

Answer:

848,022,118

Explanation:

hope this helps

Answer:

The Garratt v. Dailey case involved the issue of intentional tort, specifically the tort of battery. In this case, the plaintiff, Brian Garratt, alleged that the defendant, Denny Dailey, intentionally and unlawfully pulled a chair from beneath him as he was attempting to sit down, causing him to fall and sustain injuries. The main question in the case was whether the defendant's actions constituted intentional battery, even though he claimed it was an accident. The court ultimately ruled in favor of the plaintiff, holding that the defendant's actions were indeed intentional and constituted battery, regardless of his intent to harm.

I believe this is your answer, I hope this helps!

Answer:

The answer is A

Explanation:

Eminent Domain refers to the power of state and federal government's to take private property for public use.

When it comes to selling a partnership interest, there are two main approaches that can be taken: the aggregate approach and the entity approach.

The aggregate approach considers the partnership as a collection of individual assets and liabilities, rather than as a separate legal entity. This means that each partner's share of the partnership's assets and liabilities are considered separately. When selling a partnership interest using this approach, the buyer will essentially be acquiring the seller's share of the partnership's assets and liabilities.


One key difference between these two approaches is the level of control the buyer will have over the partnership after the sale. With the aggregate approach, the buyer will only have control over their specific share of the partnership's assets and liabilities, while with the entity approach, the buyer will have control over the partnership as a whole.

Another important factor to consider is the tax implications of each approach. Under the aggregate approach, the buyer may be subject to higher taxes, as they will be acquiring individual assets and liabilities rather than the partnership as a whole. On the other hand, the entity approach may result in lower taxes for the buyer, as they will be acquiring a portion of the partnership itself, which may have certain tax benefits.

In summary, the aggregate and entity approaches for selling a partnership interest differ in how they treat the partnership and its assets and liabilities. The choice of approach will depend on various factors, including the buyer's desired level of control and the tax implications of the sale.

To know more about Partnership refer here :

https://brainly.com/question/27020409

#SPJ11

An enumerated power is one that is given explicitly by the constitution.

Implied powers are assumed by the exercise of the enumerated powers

This means that the answer is D - Only enumerated powers are directly stated in the US Constitution. This is because, as I mentioned earlier, the enumerated powers are explicitly stated, while Implied powers are outlined and assumed based off the enumerated powers.

I hope I've helped! :)

True , The Bluebook: A Universal System of Citation, 20th ed. The most popular citation handbook for law was created by the editors of the Law Reviews at Yale, Columbia, Harvard, and Pennsylvania.

Use the abbreviated form for all footnotes. Use only the section's acronym when referencing a section's paragraphs or subsections. One way to express paragraph (b) of section 15's subsection (1) of the Human Rights Act of 1998 is as follows: (b).

The information that must be included in a citation, its arrangement, punctuation, and other formatting requirements are specified by the citation style.

To know more about The Bluebook visit :-

https://brainly.com/question/30814583

#SPJ1

The sale of motorcycle was not valid as Sam was not in a state of forming a proper consent for the agreement due to intoxication and he was also coerced into selling it because of fear of weapon.

About Consent

Whenever one person voluntarily accepts another's request or wish, this is known as consent.  It is a term that is used frequently and has precise definitions in a variety of contexts, including the law, medicine, science, or intimate relationships. Consent may not mean the same thing when used in certain settings. For instance, a person who is mentally ill, has a poor mental capacity, or is younger than the age of consent to se-xual activity may voluntarily participate in such a s-ex encounter that yet falls short of the legal standard for consent as specified by the relevant law.

To know more about consent:

brainly.com/question/29220731

#SPJ1

Answer:

court reporter

Explanation:

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

Answer:

Both statements are true regarding the relationship between Congress and the interstate commerce of the United States.

Explanation:

A. The power of Congress over commerce is indeed very broad and extends to all forms of interstate commerce, regardless of scale or magnitude. This authority is derived from the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution, which grants Congress the power to regulate commerce among the states.

B. Congress has the authority to regulate not only the activities directly involved in interstate commerce but also the individuals or entities engaged in such commerce. This includes regulating various aspects related to interstate trade, such as transportation, communication, trade practices, and market competition.

The statements that are true are option A, B and D:

a. EMT levels of certification are standardized at a national level.

b. The paramedic has studied and is able to deliver advanced life support in emergency situations.

d. EMT-B and paramedics are trained and can respond to 911 emergencies.

While paramedics can use their additional training to provide medical aid in a variety of more specific situations, EMTs typically respond to 911 calls in an ambulance. For instance, they might function as a paramedic-firefighter for a fire department.

To determine whether the patient is experiencing cardiac arrest and to begin resuscitation, EMTs and paramedics may evaluate the scene. Additionally, they send the patient to the most suitable facility for final care, which is typically the hospital that is closest and has the greatest facilities for treating cardiac arrest patients.

Note that all Candidates need to: Be at least 18 years old. The written consent of a parent or legal guardian is required for 16- and 17-year-old applicants for Emergency Medical Responder and EMT positions.

Learn more about EMT certification from

https://brainly.com/question/28046895

#SPJ1

Answer:

Law enforcement officers face many hazards in the line of duty. Though injuries from assaults and vehicular accidents are the most obvious, stress, cardiovascular disease, depression, and sulcide are also serious job-related risks.

C. You should poll more people in Canada.

To estimate the number of people who caught COVID-19 in the U.S. and Canada in 2021, the accuracy of the estimation depends on the percentage of the population surveyed. Since the population of the U.S. is significantly larger than that of Canada, it is necessary to poll a larger number of people in Canada to achieve a comparable level of accuracy between the two countries.

In this scenario, the U.S. has a population of approximately 328 million, while Canada has a population of around 38 million. When estimating the percentage of the population with COVID-19, sampling a fixed number of individuals in each country would result in a larger relative sample size in the U.S. compared to Canada.

To ensure a comparable level of accuracy in estimating the number of people with COVID-19 in both countries, it is necessary to poll a larger number of people in Canada. This compensates for the smaller population size and helps minimize the potential margin of error in the estimation. By doing so, the statistical representation of the surveyed individuals becomes more proportional to the population, increasing the reliability of the estimated percentages.

Learn more about Sample size determination

brainly.com/question/11129327

#SPJ11

Answer:

5286

Explanation:

Answer: 5,286

Explanation: There were 5,286 reported deaths of motorcyclists in 2016.

The penalty for sedition in the United States is either:

Sedition is a conspiracy to forcefully overthrow, put down, or destroy the government.

Sedition includes an act of rebellion, subversion, incitement of discontent toward, or insurrection against constituted authority.

Thus, the penalty for sedition in the United States is either death or five years imprisonment plus a minimum fine of $10,000 and a ban from holding public office.

Learn more about sedition at https://brainly.com/question/14100347

The penalty for sedition in the United States is either: Death, Five years imprisonment, a Fine of $10,000, or a Ban from holding public office.

Sedition is indeed the act of inciting opposition to the government or a behavior that does so, such as by speaking out or writing about it. Sedition is speech that encourages rebellion against the established order.

Sedition frequently involves the violation of a constitution as well as the instigation of rebellion against established authorities. Any disturbance that isn't directly and overtly violent against the law is considered sedition. Seditious language is seditious libel.

Sedition is a less serious offense than either "espionage" or "treason," which calls for the actual betrayal of both the government and the individual. Espionage entails spying on the government, selling state secrets to some other country (even one that is friendly), especially military secrets, or damaging government buildings, machinery, or supplies.

By 1918, a revised Sedition Act had been passed, making it illegal to obstruct the World War I war effort. This law was primarily utilized to prosecute antiwar protestors. The Alien Registration Act, which has been passed in 1940, strengthened the sedition charge by making it illegal to call for the destruction of the American government.

Learn more about the Sedition here:

https://brainly.com/question/29775367

#SPJ2

Those who have been convicted of committing a felony are usually incarcerated in state or federal prisons. These institutions serve as the primary facilities for housing individuals who have been found guilty of serious criminal offenses.

In contrast, many inmates are being held because they cannot afford bail and must be kept behind bars until the beginning of their trial. This situation, known as pretrial detention, affects individuals who have been accused of a crime but have not yet been convicted. Due to various reasons, such as financial constraints or flight risk concerns, some individuals are unable to secure their release by paying bail.

As a result, they remain in jail until their trial date, awaiting the resolution of their case. This has led to discussions about the fairness and effectiveness of the bail system and alternatives to pretrial detention.

To learn more about Criminal Ofenses, click here:

https://brainly.com/question/11112199

#SPJ11

Those who have been convicted of committing a felony are usually incarcerated in state or federal prisons. These institutions serve as the primary facilities for housing individuals who have been found guilty of serious criminal offenses.

In contrast, many inmates are being held because they cannot afford bail and must be kept behind bars until the beginning of their trial. This situation, known as pretrial detention, affects individuals who have been accused of a crime but have not yet been convicted. Due to various reasons, such as financial constraints or flight risk concerns, some individuals are unable to secure their release by paying bail.

As a result, they remain in jail until their trial date, awaiting the resolution of their case. This has led to discussions about the fairness and effectiveness of the bail system and alternatives to pretrial detention.

To learn more about Criminal Ofenses, click here:

brainly.com/question/11112199

#SPJ11

Answer:

very True, with an increasing severity of punishment depending on the state laws. It could be fineable up to hundreds of dollars, because the motorist is putting pedestrian lives in danger when they don't.