Some weaknesses are the inability to control money or military, as well as not being able to act unless called for by a case. However some strengths they have are that they have the power to interpret the constitution as well as being able to shape public policy.
Electronic hacking and illegal trespassing for the purposes of acquiring a competitor’s proprietary information are considered economic espionage.
<h3>
What is economic espionage?</h3>
- Economic espionage includes electronic hacking and illegal trespassing to obtain a competitor's proprietary information.
- Economic espionage is defined as the illegal or covert targeting or acquisition of sensitive financial, trade, or economic policy information; proprietary economic information; or technological information.
- Using bribery, cyber-attacks, "dumpster diving," and wiretapping.
- Creating seemingly innocent relationships with US companies in order to gather economic intelligence, including trade secrets.
- President Clinton signed the Economic Espionage Act of 1996 into law.
- It criminalizes the theft or misappropriation of trade secrets.
- It is notable for being the first federal statute to broadly define and severely punish such misappropriation and theft.
Therefore, electronic hacking and illegal trespassing for the purposes of acquiring a competitor’s proprietary information are considered economic espionage.
Know more about economic espionage here:
brainly.com/question/28218496
#SPJ4
Answer: Work release programs are designed to improve recidivism rates among inmates. In other words, it helps to make sure inmates don't go back to jail when they get out and become law abiding productive citizens.
Officials would most likely consider factors like, the crime the inmate has committed, their behavior while in jail/prison, and the inmate's willingness to be responsible.
Answer:
Loose constructionism is an ideological position of legal interpretation (especially of the Constitution) by means of which the judges have the power not only to judge compliance with the different laws, but also to interpret the text of the legal provisions of the Constitution, defining its scope and content.
Two arguments in favor of this position are, on the one hand, that the Constitution is not a rigid law but that it is constantly being modified through jurisprudential interpretations, with which it is necessary for judges to be able to interpret its clauses in a lax way; and on the other, that a rigid Constitution would be easily set aside by society, since it would not adapt to changes in circumstances on its part.
