Answer:
The Drug Quality and Security Act (DQSA), was enacted by Congress on November 27, 2013. Title II of DQSA, the Drug Supply Chain Security Act (DSCSA), outlines steps to achieve interoperable, electronic tracing of products at the package level to identify and trace certain prescription drugs as they are distributed in the United States. This will enhance FDA’s ability to help protect consumers from exposure to drugs that may be counterfeit, stolen, contaminated, or otherwise harmful. These requirements will also improve detection and removal of potentially dangerous drugs from the drug supply chain to protect U.S. consumers.
Additionally, the DSCSA directs FDA to establish national licensure standards for wholesale distributors and third-party logistics providers, and requires these entities report licensure and other information to FDA annually.
Explanation:
That we don’t need any of them in this White House
Answer:
because the Constitution does not address how state and local government share power
Option C is correct. United States uses the adversarial system in its courts. The opposing attorneys have responsibility for controlling presentation of lawsuit. Attorneys may not lie but have no duty to volunteer facts that don't support their client's case.
An impartial individual or group of people, typically a judge or jury, who try to ascertain the truth and pass judgement in accordance with it, is presented with two advocates presenting their parties' case or position under the adversarial system, also known as the adversary system, in common law countries.
Because it leaves less room for the state to be prejudiced against the defendant, advocates of the adversarial system frequently claim that it is more equitable and less prone to misuse than the inquisitional approach.
To know more about Adversarial system:
brainly.com/question/5921518
#SPJ1
Answer:
C
Explanation:
Declarations against interest are an exception to the rule on hearsay in which a person's statement may be used, where generally the content of the statement is so prejudicial to the person making it that he would not have made the statement unless he believed the statement was true.
And statements are usually made in court.
Statement Offered Against a Party That Wrongfully Caused the Declarant’s Unavailability. A statement offered against a party that wrongfully caused — or acquiesced in wrongfully causing — the declarant’s unavailability as a witness, and did so intending that result.
is exempted from testifying about the subject matter of the declarant’s statement because of the court rules
