The question is incomplete. This is the complete question:
Which of the following is not a permissible circumstance under which to implement a prior restraint, under Near v. Minnesota?
a. obscene publications.
b. Fighting words likely to promote immense violence.
c. Obstruction of military recruitment.
d. Publication of troop movement in the time of war.
Answer:
The answer is b. Fighting words likely to promote immense violence.
Explanation:
Although it is possible for certain words to cause immense violence when used in publications, under Near v. Minnesota (a United States Supreme Court decision which declared that prior restraints on publication violated the freedom of speech and press) it is still not permissible to implement a prior restraint, even when publications use fighting words that are likely to promote immense violence.
Answer:
✔️Increasing oversight to end corruption ➡️creating administrative regions to centralize government
✔️Expanding equal opportunity in government ➡️ Creating merit-based appointments
✔️Protecting civil liberties ➡️ Creating a code of laws
Explanation:
Napoleon Bonaparte, French statesman and military leader was known to have led many successful campaigns. This took place during the French Revolution and the French Revolutionary Wars. He was also an Emperor of the French. He set up code of laws which gave all citizens equality and also gave them freedom of religion. The expansion of equal opportunity in government helped to create a merit-based system. He did reinforce the executive in its actions.
Answer:
d. all of the above
Explanation:
Arbitration is a legal technique of resolving disputes outside the courts, whereby parties involved in the dispute refer it to an arbitrator (the "arbitrators", "arbiters" or "arbitral tribunal") or arbitrators( one or more persons) , by whose decision (the "award") they may be bound(as in mandatory arbitration) or not(as in voluntary or nonbinding arbitration).
The above methods of arbitration :peer review, arbitration, mediation all allow the dispute parties' input before arbitration decision. Peer review method involves dispute resolution in the workplace whereby employees are able to take disputes to fellow employees and managers to act as arbitrator to resolve disputes which may not be binding on the parties. Mediation on another hand is a dynamic method of dispute resolution where a third party helps to resolve disputes by helping dispute parties negotiate to resolve to dispute. Arbitration however differs from mediation in that the arbitrator makes decisions based on evidence presented and not waiting to negotiate an agreement between both parties. All three methods however require dispute parties to make inputs so as to arrive on final decision.
The answer is c.they will one day be used up
