This means that they are unwelcome guests to someone elses home.
Answer:
D - Hiring key personnel
Explanation:
Political canvassing can be seen by many to mean the process of going out in the field to talk to voters that live in a particular area. Going to speak to potential voters at their homes has seem quite effective because it would be a good way to know where they live in the targeted area.
Canvassing can be expensive because there are costs associated with the hiring of key personnel to coordinate canvassers for you, and obtaining a registration list of voters.
According to strain theory, there are five adaptations to social strain. conformity and rebellion are two types of these adaptations. The other three are ritualism, retreatism , and innovation.
<h3>What is strain theory?</h3>
According to the strain theory in sociology, pressure from societal conditions such a lack of money or inadequate education pushes people to commit crimes. The concepts behind strain theory were first articulated in the 1930s by American sociologist Robert K. Merton. In the 1950s, his research on the subject had a particularly significant impact. Other specialists, like American sociologists Richard Cloward and Lloyd Ohlin, as well as American criminologist Albert Cohen, put forth comparable hypotheses.
When the failure to attain shared objectives (such as the realization of the "American dream") was considered as a driving factor behind crime, classic strain theories typically focused on underprivileged people. those whose incomes were below the poverty threshold.
To learn more about strain theory:
brainly.com/question/14311069
#SPJ4
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.
