Answer:
allowing the president to veto legislative acts
Explanation:
Answer:
the public health organization stop foodborne illness recommends one of two mrthods.
Explanation:
you can eithet suspend your dishes in a really hot water bath at least 170 degrees F ,for at least 30 seconds. Or soak dishes in a sanitizing solution of bleach and water one teaspoon of unscented chlorine bleach.
Hello. This question is incomplete. The full question is:
"Tori has been a personal secretary for the Governor for the past three years. During this time, Tori has observed what he considers to be insincerity on the part of the Governor with regards to interest in social causes. Tori has seen money that was to go to schools and children's hospitals questionably disappear. The Governor is more interested in spending the federal government's money for his own agenda than for helping people.
Tori reasons, "The public has a right to be treated fairly. He is violating the rights of these children. I need to gather more information and, if I am right, I need to report this behavior." Which philosophy best depicts Tori's reasoning:"
Answer:
Virtue ethics
Explanation:
Virtue ethics is a philosophy that refers to the emphasis on the moral virtues of the human being. Through this philosophy, people seek to do what is right, what is centered on honesty, transparency and the highest ethical and moral standards.
When Tory decides to expose the acts of dishonesty that her governor promotes, she is trying to do something fair and just, which will intensify her honesty and allow people to have justice. This shows that she is committed to the ethical philosophy of virtue.
One effect was that construction of residential homes was breaking all recent records. I don’t know if you have to paraphrase it because these are the exact words from the document.
Miranda v. Arizona is the U.S. Supreme Court case that condemned using psychological coercion, engaging in trickery or deceit, holding a suspect incommunicado, or making promises that can't be kept.
The Miranda v. Arizona Supreme Court ruling (1966) ruled that arrested persons have rights to self-discrimination and lawyers under the fifth and sixth amendments to the United States Constitution.
The Supreme Court ruled that detained criminal suspects must be informed of their constitutional rights against defense counsel and self-incrimination before cross-examinating police.
the majority opinion by Earl Warren. Article 5 of the Constitutional Amendment requires law enforcement authorities to advise suspects on their right to remain silent during police detention interrogations and to consult lawyers.
Learn more about Miranda v. Arizona here: brainly.com/question/1307890
#SPJ4