Answer:
Black citizens were still disenfranchised through the use of Jim Crow tactics, including literacy tests, poll taxes and intimidation and violence
Explanation:
The third one because if you look up the question it say what they are in different wording, so I looked at all what they meant so it should be the third one
Answer:
The concept of the world being flat has extended beyond geographical boundaries to the rapid blurring and demolition of economic ones. Globalisation is not an expansionary mindset anymore and in many cases, a strategic imperative to identify growth opportunities. Organisations are increasingly looking beyond their national markets. E-commerce and the emergence of digital and social marketing practices have led to a level playing field for organisations and customers and have redefined competition. Price wars have become increasingly common. Established brands are increasingly under threat from emerging private label brands.
Given the massive interconnectedness of the business world and emerging models of competition and growth, how can organisations maintain their core underlying brand identity? In addition to competitive market factors, worldwide external shocks like the global recession have also severely impacted businesses at both local and global level. The key question that emerges is that whether there is now a continual need for brands to adapt or face the threat of extinction if they practice consistency.
Answer: The situation is unconstitutional because it is defamation or libel
Explanation: The freedom of the press is guaranteed by the First Amendment of the American Constitution, which regulates all the rights and obligations of the media, including the press. This means that everyone has the right to freely report and write, and freely express their opinions without censorship. However, there are some limitations when it comes to press freedom. There are, among other things, the extent to which the journalist, i.e the writer of the article, can secure the protection of a confidential source, then also indecency. In this our case it is defamation which, when it comes to defamation in the press, calls libel. If Nancy wanted to make up a story about a politician she personally dislikes, then it is defamation. The First Amendment also does not guarantee the journalist the right to interfere personal feelings about the politician with professional writing in the newspaper. This means that if Nancy made up the story of a politician without real evidence of any wrongdoing, then it was defamation in the newspaper, therefore, libel.
Answer:
Technically the answer would probably be C.4th Amendment/violated
Explanation:
However if the student is suspicious then the school has every right to check their bag because of concerns. For this specific question C is the answer but based on personal experience that really doesn't make sense to put it.
