Answer:
False
Explanation:
State government will be involved and can also request assistance from the federal government. The assistance becomes available upon request of the State Governor which may be by the declaration of the President or not. Federal Emergency Management Agency through it the Federal Response Plan coordinate an emergency response team to undertake interventions to aid State governments.
<span>Jim walks through the door and stares fixedly with a strange look on his face. He seems as if in a trance because he is neither angry or surprised, he doesn't disapprove and he isn't horrified, which were all of the feelings Della expected. Jim is in disbelief due to the fact that he has bought beautiful tortoise shell combs for Della who no longer has the beautiful long hair to hold the clips.</span>
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.
Answer:
universal screening assessments
Explanation:
Screening: The term screening is referred to as the process which is being conducted to predict or identify students at risk of poor learning consequences.
Universal screening assessments: It is considered as brief assessments and is conducted on every student from a particular grade. It is responsible for identifying different students who are at risk related to academic difficulty on the RTI model and therefore given extra support.
In the question above, the given statement represents universal screening assessments.
Answer: False
Explanation:
It is wrong to check educational qualifications for a job candidate later as this defeats the reason for education and is a fault base for judging a candidate, Education qualification should be one of the basics for employment.
