When the writers of the Constitution were initially deciding what powers and responsibilities the executive branch—headed by the president—would have, they were heavily influenced by their experience with the British government under King George III. Having seen how the king and other European monarchs tended to abuse their powers, the designers of the Constitution wanted to place strict limits on the power that the president would have. At the same time, they wanted to give the president enough power to conduct foreign policy and to run the federal government efficiently without being hampered by the squabbling of legislators from individual states. In other words, the Framers wanted to design an executive office that would provide effective and coherent leadership but that could never become a tyranny.
Read more: Executive Branch - The Executive Branch And The Constitution - President, Power, Powers, and Framers - JRank Articles https://law.jrank.org/pages/6652/Executive-Branch-Executive-Branch-Constitution.html#ixzz6rIgGN7y3
Answer:
Two actions which took place.
1) was it a defamation for the publisher - yes,
2) false light? no
Explanation:
It was a defamation of character from the publisher because what he did could cause harm to the young child, One thing is show though the accusation of a false light is a no. And lana can't complain about how her pictrue was made because she was in a public space so no reasonable expectation of privacy.
Answer: The 18th Amendment, prohibiting the manufacture, transportation and sale of intoxicating liquors.
Alike: The 21st Amendment to the United States Constitution was passed, repealing the 18th Amendment and ending the prohibition of alcohol in America.
It would be more dangerous if the cars bounced off. This is because the airbags will deploy if the car stops, leaving them only with the injuries they have. However, if they bounce off, they can hit additional cars or accidently fall off a cliff. The damage opportunity is worse if they bounce off.
I hope this helps! :)
Answer:
<h3>Act of State Doctrine.</h3>
Explanation:
According to the U.S Constitution, the Act of State Doctrine is a principle that respects the sovereignty of an independent state. It declares that sovereign states should respect the independence and integrity of other independent sovereign states.
The doctrine implies that domestic decisions of sovereign states should not be questioned by other independent states. Domestic decisions of another independent state should be respected by other independent states.
Here, since Nation A has apprehended the culprit in its country, it has the full right to decide what punishment and verdict should be given to the culprit. Through the Act of State Doctrine, it gains full immunity to handle the culprit on its own discretion. Nation B has no right to make any claims or alter the decision of Nation A.
