Answer: I need points and i honestly dont know, sorry ;<
Explanation:
I think he had no right to privacy.
<u>Explanation:</u>
According to the law and order, with search warrant issued by court (head of the judiciary system) police has the power to search and seize any illegal work. Even when the convict caught in red hand police can take him under their custody up to the further proceedings through court.
Under this circumstances, no privacy work. Now depending upon the nature of crime decision will be taken. If any case convict issue anticipatory bail before the search operation he can relieve himself temporarily from the instant harassment.
Answer:
they thought in ways of reason instead of what they were told and was a break way to change
Answer: E. society's willingness to forego other goods and services, both public and private.
A country's government has to deal with the problem of limited resources all the time. It also has to deal with accountability. This means that the government will need to make decisions on budget allocation based on the preferences of citizens. If a large percentage of citizens want security to be improved at the expense of other goods and services, this is more likely to be implemented.
Well, before you start, you need to choose a side. If you are confused on the phrasing, it is simply asking:
Do you agree that the Supreme Court should be able to think of the law differently during a case to fit with current views?
After that, start thinking of why.
Yes, they should, the Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution to change as societal views changed.
No, they shouldn't, just because societal views are changing, what we need for our country to run smoothly is the same as it has been,
Hope I could help!
