Answer:
Check below for the answers and explanations
Explanation:
1) Standing is the process of examining the right of a plaintiff to take a lawsuit to the court of law.
Standing is important to ensure that the case brought to court is actually a dispute and not a contempt from an aggrieved party. It also ensures that the innocent is not unlawfully punished.
2) Sierra Club could have had a standing to file the lawsuit if it had an evidence or a likelihood of being injured or harmed
3) The Sierra club case led to the birth of a dissent that environmental objects should be regarded as persons in ecological matters.
4)The case did not have standing because it was filed by an organization and this conflicts with the Animal Welfare Act which stated that individuals and organizations do not have standing to file a lawsuit in a court.
5) Mr Jurnove, a worker of the Animal Legal Defence Fund was able to provide a substantial claim of the injuries he suffered when he saw the ill treatment the animals were subjected to by USDA.
Though other plaintiffs do not have standing, as far as one of them does, it will not be considered whether or not the others have standing. Therefore, the plaintiff had standing.
6) None of the plaintiffs that were acting on behalf of the dolphin met the requirement of "Injury in fact", a necessary requirement to have standing. None of them could give evidences of the injuries suffered as a result of the act by The New England Aquarium.
Answer:
They choose off of the yearly test
Explanation:
Answer:
intimate terrorism
Explanation:
An intimate terrorism can be referred to as the presence of physical assault by a relationship partner; the partners could be a current partner or an ex partner.
The physical assault is in such a way that varieties of tactics are used to maintain control over the other person in the relationship
As mentioned earlier, intimate terrorism involved physical assaults and it can assume any of the following forms; it could be physical, verbal, emotional, economic and sexual abuse.
Answer:
They are both right because Barack Obama was the one who elected the justices into the Supreme Court but they are of course in no way connected to Barack Obama except for the fact that he was the one who elected them into the court.
This case will need to be tried at least in a federal and a transnational or international court. Moreover, this will involve both national and international jurisdictions.
In law, there are three main types of courts:
- Constitutional courts.
- Federal courts.
- Transnational courts.
Each of these applies the jurisdiction of the same level. For example, a constitutional court will apply the constitutional laws and specific state laws.
In the case presented, two of these courts are required:
- Federal court: This is necessary because the crime was perpetrated in the U.S. territory, and therefore criminals are judged under U.S. Federal law.
- Transnational court: Considering the pirates might not be American, and therefore there are at least 2 countries involved, it is necessary to consider the case under international maritime laws.
Learn more about law in: brainly.com/question/6590381
