If you lay siege to the castle you don't risk the lives of your men and loss of equipment, You can just "wait it out" - the castle is going to run our of resources and likely surrender. So if you can afford to wait, laying siege is a better idea.
Most trench warfare battles took place right before dawn.
The answer that will fill in the blank is that the person
who is photographing pictures of various scenes involving nature and manmade is
likely to expect that there is a production of horizontal and vertical
orientations as this is usually produced when taking or using a camera when
using it in a portrait or landscape mode.
<u>Identity Theft</u> occurs when criminals obtain personal information that allows them to impersonate someone else in order to use the person's credit to obtain financial accounts and make purchases.
<u>Explanation</u>:
Theft is an action of committing crime. Theft is also defined as taking someone’s property or things without their permission or knowledge.
<u>Identity theft</u> means stealing someone’s identity and using them to gain financial advantage. Identity theft can happen in many ways. Some of them are committing theft on financial identity, medical identity, insurance identity, driver’s license and social security identity. Identity theft can be reported to federal trade commission.
Answer:
a. The Equal Protection Clause is a clause from the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The clause provides that "nor shall any State [...] deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws".
Its purpose is to apply substantially more constitutional restrictions against the states than had applied before the Civil War. Hence, in Shaw v. Reno, 509 U.S. 630 (1993), Supreme Court held that redistricting based on race must be held to a standard of strict scrutiny under the equal protection clause while bodies doing redistricting must be conscious of race to the extent that they must ensure compliance with the Voting Rights Act.
While in the case of Easley v. Cromartie, 532 U.S. 234 (2001), Supreme Court held that the State violated the Equal Protection Clause in drawing the 1997 boundaries was based on clearly erroneous findings.
b. In the case of Easley v. Cromartie, an appeal from the decision given in hunt v. Cromartie was filed in the supreme court of the United States by Easley. In hunt v. Cromartie, the court held that the legislature of North Carolina did not use the factor of race while drawing the boundaries in the twelfth congressional district,1992. It was held by the court that the legislature did not violate the equal protection clause of the constitution and no evidence to prove that legislature set its boundaries on a racial basis rather than a political basis.
In Easley v Cromartie the appeal was that drawing the boundaries for voting violated the equal protection clause of the constitution. The supreme court of the United States held that the decision of the district court is erroneous because it actually relied upon racial factors and this is not in the interest of the state.
In Shaw v. Reno the court concluded that the plan of North Carolina tried to segregate the voters on the basis of race.
